people matter survey report 2014 - ocpe.nt.gov.au

T H E O FFI CE O F T H E CO M M I S S I O N ER FO R PU B LI C E M PLOY M E NT

Northern Territory Public Sector

People Matter SurveyReport 2014

OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT

NTPS PEOPLE MATTER SURVEY REPORT 2014-15

Purpose of the Report

The Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment undertakes a biennial employee survey as part of its assessment of performance and wellbeing within the Northern Territory Public Sector. In developing and improving performance, NTPS agencies should use the information contained in the 2014 NTPS People Matter Survey Report in conjunction with their agency-specific Benchmark Report, as well as the 2014-15 State of the Service Report.

Published by the Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment.

© Northern Territory Government of Australia 2015

Apart from any use permitted under the Australian Copyright Act, no part of this document may be reproduced without prior written permission from the Northern Territory Government through the Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment.

ISSN 2206-0235

Enquiries should be made to:

The Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment GPO Box 4371 Darwin NT 0801 Telephone: 08 8999 4282 Facsimile: 08 8999 4186 Email: [email protected] www.nt.gov.au/ocpe

The wellbeing of NTPS employees underpins the continued delivery of quality service, both to Government and people of the Territory.

NORTHERN TERRITORY PUBLIC SECTOR

PEOPLE MATTER SURVEY REPORT 201401CONTENTS

03 Background

Summary Results

Informing Performance Improvements

Employee-group response profiles

04

05

07

01 Commissioner’s Foreword

Executive Summary02Introduction 4

Key positive findings 5

Opportunities for improvement 5

Differences across groups 7

Next steps 8

Public Sector Employment and Management Act 10

Survey methodology 10

Scoring of responses 11

Response Rate 14

Profile of Response Sample 18

NTPS Values and PSEMA Principles 21

Work Environment 23

Job Satisfaction and Engagement 24-25

Management Indices 26

Bullying 30

Feedback and Talking Performance 35

Performance Management 36

01

| CO

NT

EN

TS

Appendices08

List of Figures

Gender 58

Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander Status 59

Disability 61

Managerial Responsibility 62

Employment Type 63

Caring Responsibility 64

Age Group 66

FIGURE 4.1: Response rates for the NTPS workforce and individual agencies - with comparison to previous years where available 15

FIGURE 4.2: Proportion of the overall workforce within each agency compared to the survey sample. 16

FIGURE 4.3: Geographic distribution of respondents. 17

FIGURE 4.4: Comparison of the workforce profile against the survey sample profile for gender, age, disability, ATSI status, length of service and full-time/part-time status. 18

FIGURE 4.5: Comparison of the workforce profile against the survey sample profile by region, salary and employment type. 19

FIGURE 4.6: Sample characteristics for place of birth, first language, ATSI background, disability, manager status, highest educational achievement and caring responsibilities. 20

FIGURE 4.7: Awareness of organisational policies and processes 21

FIGURE 4.8: Values and Principles 22

FIGURE 4.9: Work Environment 23

FIGURE 4.10: Job Satisfaction 24

FIGURE 4.11: Engagement Index 25

FIGURE 4.12: Management Indices 26

FIGURE 4.13: Views on management by demographic group 28

FIGURE 4.14: Experienced or witnessed bullying in past 12 months 30

FIGURE 4.15: Experience of bullying by demographic sub-group 31

FIGURE 4.16: Witnessed bullying by demographic sub-group 32

FIGURE 4.17: Sources of bullying - as experienced by demographic sub-groups 33

FIGURE 4.18: Experienced bullying by jurisdiction 34

FIGURE 4.19: Feedback and Talking Performance 35

FIGURE 4.20: Employees with a current performance plan in place 36

FIGURE 5.1: Change management views ranked by employee group 42

FIGURE 5.2: Engagement Index by Performance Planning 43

FIGURE 5.3: Performance management experience against empoyee experience, job satisfaction, wellbeing and view of managerial decision-making 44

FIGURE 6.1: Agreement with adherence to NTPS Values 46

FIGURE 6.2: Agreement with adherence to PSEMA Employment Principles 47

FIGURE 6.3: Agreement with statements relating to work environment 48

FIGURE 6.4: Confidence in Workgroup and Management 49

FIGURE 6.5: Job Satisfaction 50

FIGURE 6.6: Engagement Index 50

FIGURE 6.7: Effective feedback 51

FIGURE 6.8: Awareness of organisational policies and processes 51

FIGURE 6.9: Working life intentions; retirement and planned duration of working life within the NTPS and broader labour market ( i.e. outside the NTPS) 52

FIGURE 6.10: Experienced or witnessed bullying in the past 12 months 53

FIGURE 6.11: Formal complaints and satisfaction with outcome 53

FIGURE 6.12: Nature, offender and actions taken by witnesses 54

FIGURE 6.13.1: Female 55

FIGURE 6.13.2: Male 55

FIGURE 6.13.3: Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander 55

FIGURE 6.13.4: Prefer not to identify as either ATSI or non-ATSI 55

FIGURE 6.13.5: Disability 56

FIGURE 6.13.6: Non-ongoing 56

FIGURE 6.13.7: Ongoing 56

FIGURE 6.13.8: 55+ years of age 56

FIGURE 7.1: Values, principles, work environment, job satisfaction and engagement by gender 58

FIGURE 7.2: Values, principles, work environment, job satisfaction and engagement by ATSI status 59

FIGURE 7.3: Values, principles, work environment, job satisfaction and engagement by disability 61

FIGURE 7.4: Values, principles, work environment, job satisfaction and engagement by management status 62

FIGURE 7.5: Values, principles, work environment, job satisfaction and engagement by employment type 63

FIGURE 7.6: Values, principles, work environment, job satisfaction and engagement by caring responsibility 64

FIGURE 7.7: Values, principles, work environment, job satisfaction and engagement by caring responsibility type 65

FIGURE 7.8: Values, principles, work environment, job satisfaction and engagement by age 66

Detailed Results06Values 46

Job Satisfaction and Engagement 50

Your Experiences 51

Working-Life Intentions 52

Bullying 53

Appendix 1 – Reading the Results 68

Appendix 2 – NTPS Values and PSEMA Employment Principles 70

Appendix 3 – NTPS 2014 People Matter Survey Instrument 71

Employee Engagement: Driving Productivity 38

02 NORTHERN TERRITORY PUBLIC SECTOR

PEOPLE MATTER SURVEY REPORT 2014

01

| CO

MM

ISSION

ER

’S FO

RE

WO

RD

Since its introduction in 2009, the Northern Territory Public Sector (NTPS) Employee Survey has played a central role in shaping conversations between the Commissioner for Public Employment, NTPS agencies and employees.

In early 2014, the Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment (OCPE) completed a review of the existing NTPS survey instrument, concluding that a number of revisions would be necessary to, firstly, keep pace with an emerging trend towards inter-jurisdictional comparability of survey data and, secondly, to broaden the conversation to better explore issues of significance to the sector, its agencies and our employees.

With the support of the Victorian Public Sector Commission (VPSC), survey questions were revised and a new analytical methodology (following that of Victoria’s own People Matter Survey) was adopted to introduce better comparability with other jurisdictions. In coming years, it is anticipated that this will enable better comparison of data with other jurisdictions; at the whole of sector level and between comparable agencies and service areas.

The NTPS People Matter Survey 2014 was open between 22 October and 11 November 2014, during which time 20,000 NTPS employees were invited to participate, and we received 7,877 completed responses. The 2014 response rate was 38 per cent; an increase of 22 per cent (or seven percentage points) over the 2011 response rate.

In addition to this, the whole-of-sector report, 30 agency-specific reports, and 405 executive-level group reports, have been prepared and distributed to assist individual agencies and work areas to guide ongoing efforts to improve corporate policies, processes, standards and systems. The introduction of benchmark scores for ‘like agencies’ to agency-specific reports should also be of use to leaders looking to compare the effectiveness of practices between agencies.

A summary of changes made to the survey in 2014 includes:

§ strengthening business rules around privacy (supported by appropriate systems and software); precluding the possibility that data may be disaggregated and lead to the disclosure of individual records

§ adopting additional questions around bullying (as piloted by the ACTPS) that more closely explore the nature of this behaviour

§ notifying casual employees by mail, including options to support their participation in the survey

§ enabling all employees, including those on leave, to complete the survey via non networked devices, including home computers, tablets and smartphones

§ phasing out paper-based surveys and reinvesting the funds saved from printing into improving access and addressing concerns around anonymity – the two biggest issues for users. In real terms, this means that more people were afforded an opportunity to participate and our response sample is both larger and more representative of our workforce as a whole.

I wish to thank those who participated in the survey and reiterate my ongoing commitment to support appropriate responses to the feedback you have provided, whether agency-specific or sector wide.

Craig Allen NT Commissioner for Public Employment

01 | COMMISSIONER’S FOREWORD

03NORTHERN TERRITORY PUBLIC SECTOR


EXECUTIVE SUMMARYIntroduction 4

Key positive findings 5

Opportunities for improvement 5

Differences across groups 7

Next steps 8

02 | EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

04

02

| EX

EC

UT

IVE

SUM

MA

RY



The results from the NTPS 2014 People Matter Survey build on the results from the previous Public Sector Employee Surveys of 2011 and 2009.

A total of 7,887 employees across 32 agencies completed the online survey, giving an overall response rate of 38 per cent. This represents a notable increase in the response rate compared to the Public Sector Employee Survey 2011.

As with previous biennial employee surveys, the principal aim of the NTPS 2014 People Matter Survey remains to gauge the employment relationship between the Commissioner for Public Employment and NTPS employees.

The measurement of employee perceptions regarding the alignment of behaviours and practices with the General Principles and the NTPS Code of Conduct (outlined in the Public Sector Employment and Management Act (PSEMA)) are not simply an indicator of legislative compliance but also provide valuable insight into the productivity and the sustainability of our workforce.

In addition, the survey provides an opportunity to collect information about the expectations, intentions and demographic characteristics of the NTPS workforce. This information serves to inform management of strategic workforce planning issues; particularly around projected capability gaps. While the survey itself does not directly measure the capabilities of respondents, in can some instances, provide insight into cohorts of a particular professional type.

The survey provides NTPS leaders with an opportunity to benchmark the views of their workforce and track progress against specific issues over time. Those with an interest in maintaining or improving workforce capacity and capability will also find the data useful in their efforts to balance sustainable levels of employee engagement with an appropriate focus on wellbeing.

The NTPS 2014 People Matter Survey introduces a number of changes from previous surveys. Of most significance is the transition to a standardized questionnaire and analytical methodology that fits more closely with those of other jurisdictions.

While there are opportunities to compare some 2014 results with previous years, the NTPS 2014 People Matter Survey is, by and large, a new instrument. Direct comparisons across most items are therefore not possible. Throughout the report, references are made where possible to results from previous years.

The profile of the survey sample is representative of the NTPS worforce at large, meaning it can be used to confidently inform workforce planning initiatives and policies. Further work is planned to compare our results against other jurisdictions using People Matter and this will be published on the NTPS People Matter website as a supplementary report late in 2015.

050

2 | E

XE

CU

TIV

E SU

MM

AR

Y



KEY POSITIVE FINDINGSMany strengths of the NTPS workforce were identified including the following:

§ 80 per cent of employees view their agency as an employer of choice and 67 per cent responded that they are proud to be public servants

§ 89 per cent of respondents indicated their agencies have a strong commitment to diversity and equal opportunity employment

§ Around 90 per cent of employees belonging to potentially vulnerable demographic sub-groups found that they did not face barriers to success within their agency

§ At 67 per cent, job satisfaction is high, with 78 per cent of employees feeling they have opportunities to fulfill their potential

§ Employee engagement across the sector is positive, although there are signs that we need to do more to ensure this is sustainable in the long term

§ A clear majority of employees agree that they and their colleagues behave in accordance with the PSEMA General Principles, the NTPS Values and Code of Conduct

§ 96 per cent of employees recognise that they contribute towards achieving agency objectives and 78 per cent responded that they are provided with an opportunity to work to their potential

§ 90 per cent of respondents agree that their workplaces are committed to employee health and safety

§ 85 per cent employees agreed that their direct manager or supervisor is good at managing people

Key comparisons to the 2011 survey results:

§ Employees report a continued improvement in confidence in their manager/supervisor’s ability to deal with workplace grievances and disputes

§ Awareness of grievance resolution processes has increased to 79 per cent (from 67 per cent in 2011) and 69 per cent of respondents agreed that an investigation would be thorough and objective

§ The number of employees who indicated that they do not feel overly stressed at work has risen from 47 per cent to 71 per cent

§ Across the sector, flexible workplace arrangements continue to grow, although it remains unclear how satisfied employees accessing these arrangements are. To improve our insight into this area, the 2016 survey will introduce additional questions that will gauge the likely impacts of flexible practices on employee satisfaction, wellbeing and engagement

OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENTThe results obtained from the NTPS 2014 People Matter Survey are similar in many respects to survey results from other large public sector organisations.

Results indicate opportunities for improvement in the following areas:

§ Managing performance

Results in this area are mixed. While PSEMA and Employment Instruction 4 require all agencies to have a formal performance management system in place, only 73 per cent of survey respondents report that they are aware of such a system in their agency. NTPS 2014 State of the Service results report that two thirds of employees have had a performance management conversations in the past 12 months while the survey sample indicates this figure sits closer to 44 per cent. This is an indication that further efforts are needed to embed formal performance management processes within the NTPS . OCPE will consider opportunities for introducing more effective support and/or compliance measures.

While in 2011 there was a marked increase in the percentage of employees who reported having received an individual performance feedback session in the past twelve months, the 2014 results show this has plateaued.

§ Change management

This is an area in which our employees continue to voice concerns. Less than half of employees indicate that change in their agencies is managed in a way that effectively engaged staff. A substantial number of free-text comments also related to issues of poorly led or communicated change management processes.


06

02

| EX

EC

UT

IVE

SUM

MA

RY




§ Management

As with the results of previous years, responses to the 2014 survey signal that views on management and leadership were varied. In broad terms, feedback relating to management was positive. Respondents tended to be most positive about management competencies within their workgroup as well as those of their immediate manager. Agency-level management scores were also largely positive, with the noticeable exception of responses to questions indexed under ‘Senior Management’. As discussed in more detail within the body of the report.

The current Senior Management index largely focuses on change management. While this is an important measure, it is felt that the index casts a too narrow view of the skills and capabilities required at this level. In future surveys, additional questions will likely be added to increase the scope of of how we measure views on Senior Management.

Although our management scores are in keeping with an organization of our size, it is worth noting that segments of the NTPS that show a strong and embedded performance management and feedback culture, fared substantially better than the average. This further supports the need for a renewed focus on performance management within our agencies.

§ Bullying

Levels of perceived bullying remain fairly stable across the 2014, 2011 and 2009 surveys with no discernable trend yet to emerge.

Reported experiences of bullying were at 22 per cent and witnessed bullying at 33 per cent indicating that bullying remains a significant and frequently observed issue across the sector.

As observed in previous surveys (and across all jurisdictions), the response rate for witnessed bullying substantially exceeds that of experienced bullying. The purpose for measuring the rate of witnessed bullying may appear somewhat obscure, however, it is best read as an indication of the level to which bullying is visible within an agency. A high degree of visibility is, in most ways, a positive and should bear no direct relationship to the frequency of bullying incidents within an agency. In short, the more people that have observed and noted an incident, the greater the recognition within agencies that such behaviour is inappropriate.

The most common forms of bullying are intimidation and exclusion/isolation, with the Senior Managers being most likely to instigate a bullying incident and clients/customers the least likely.

While efforts to promulgate a technically accurate definition of bullying within agencies are encouraged, this should not be at the expense of continued efforts to curb inappropriate and unproductive behaviours. Conjecture around whether bullying response rates within the survey accords with the definition in the Code of Conduct is not a meaningful step towards addressing inappropriate behaviours.

§ Employee Engagement

Using 2014 survey data, a key driver analysis was again conducted to explore the potential priorities arising from the survey. Employee engagement was taken to be the decisive factor between ordinary or poor performing workplaces and those which excel.

Based on the findings of the key driver analysis, Section 5 goes on to explore how improvements to change management and performance management processes impact on engagement and its positive corollaries.

§ Impressions of agency responsiveness to survey results

As in 2011, just over one third of respondents believed their agency would take action as a result of the survey. Given the importance of the survey data to the operational requirements of the NTPS, it is essential that the survey is demonstrated as an effective and credible initiative. To encourage responses and improve visibility, the Commissioner for Public Employment has commenced a reporting program that will allow agencies to better demonstrate and publicise their response.

070

2 | E

XE

CU

TIV

E SU

MM

AR

Y




DIFFERENCES ACROSS GROUPSSection 6 provides some insight into the views of a number employee groups. Profiles have been included based on the following distinctions:

- Gender1

- Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander (ATSI) status

- Disability

- Managerial responsibility (manager/non-manager)

- Employment type (permanent/temporary)

- Caring responsibility

- Age group

The profiles make apparent any disparity between cohorts regarding their views on NTPS Values and PSEMA Principles in practice, as well as gauging views on aspects such as workplace wellbeing, employee commitment, change, management, job satisfaction, employee engagement and personal commitment.

Generally, wherever an employee group was in the minority, they had a less positive view of their agency, as well as lower commitment, job satisfaction and engagement. The most dramatic range in views occurs between those employees with a disability and those without, with the gap being several times larger than for that of other minority groups. An exception to this was temporary employees who, although in the minority, had a higher opinion of their agencies adherence to the Values and Principles, as well as a more positive view of their workplace environment. Temporary employees also scored higher for commitment, job satisfaction and employee engagement. No attempt to explain these differences is made within this report; however, it is expected that observations will inform further work at both whole-of-sector and agency levels.

Gender

Consistent both with previous surveys and the 2014 State of the Service Report, the response rate for males (37 per cent) was markedly lower than for females (63 per cent).

The NTPS 2014 People Matter Survey did not include an option for people to choose a gender other than female and male. In recognising that this conventional dichotomy omits a number of valid genders, from 2016 the NTPS People Matter Survey will include another category for those who do not identify as

being either female or male. This not only signals the NTPS’ support of its employees but enables greater insight into the issues that may be affecting this segment of the workforce.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees

The response rate for ATSI employees (seven per cent) is lower than that of the workforce (nine per cent) but not significantly so. Five per cent of respondents preferred not to identify whether they were ATSI or non-ATSI.

Disability

Again, in 2014, the number of employees identifying as having a disability that restricts the performance of everyday activities and is long-term (four per cent) was substantially greater than the rate of those who self-identify on PIPS (one per cent). It is not within the scope of this report to speculate on the reasons behind this under-reporting but the discrepency is an indicator that there is likely a substantial undercount in employees working with disability across the sector. OCPE will continue to work with agencies to encourage self-identification and promote the benefits to employees with disability.

Scores for employees with a disability were most notable for being substantially and consistently lower than for those without disability – to the degree that this cohort of employees is very clearly the least positive of any reviewed.

Fixed-term employees (excluding Executive Contract Officers)

The NTPS 2014 NTPS People Matter Survey was the first NTPS employee survey in which fixed-term, part-time and casual employees were enabled to participate online, without having to log-on at work or pick up and mail a form. This was enabled by the move away from paper-based survey questionnaires and the reinvestment of costs saved into more appropriate technological solutions.

At 26 per cent of the response cohort, fixed-term employees are a substantial minority within the NTPS workforce. Unusually for a demographic minority, fixed-term employees were more positive than their colleagues when responding to the survey.

1 It is noted that the gender options did not accommodate employees who identify with a gender other than male or female. The 2016 survey will address this through the addition of an ‘other’ category.

08

02

| EX

EC

UT

IVE

SUM

MA

RY




Fixed-term employees were one of only two minority groups (the other being managers) who responded more positively than the sector average.

Managers

Like temporary employees, managers defied the trend amongst minority demographic sub-groups by responding more positively to the survey than their non-manager colleagues. In comparison to non-managers, managers held more positive views in relation to the practice of almost all NTPS Values and PSEMA Principles in their agency, the highest ranked being ‘accountability’’, ‘impartiality’, ‘merit’ and ‘performance and conduct’. Managers indicated a similarly high view of their work environment, and level of job satisfaction and engagement.

Age

A review of response by age category revealed minimal difference between the three ranges across the majority of survey responses.

NEXT STEPS

Communication and accountability

The biggest challenge following an employee survey is planning and communicating actions across the sector. Agencies have been undertaking significant work to communicate survey results to their employees – and their responses to issues –since the release of agency-specific survey reports in March 2015.

In 2015, all agencies were asked to prepare a Survey Response Plan. These plans will be used by OCPE to maintain a list of actions and outcomes from across the sector, to be hosted on the People Matter intranet website: www.peoplemattersurvey.nt.gov.au. In preparation for the NTPS 2016 People Matter Survey, significant renewal of the website will commence in late 2015.

The next survey is tentatively scheduled for mid-August 2016.

In 2015, all agencies were asked to prepare a Survey Response Plan. These plans will be used to track actions and provide online updates of outcomes.

09

BACKGROUND



Public Sector Employment and Management Act 10

Survey methodology 10

Scoring of responses 11

10

03

| BA

CK

GR

OU

ND



03 | BACKGROUND

PUBLIC SECTOR EMPLOYMENT AND MANAGEMENT ACT The NTPS 2014 People Matter Survey provides an opportunity to gain insights into agency performance (or, more accurately, perceptions of performance), including whether employees, their colleagues and managers are delivering their business in accordance with their responsibilities under PSEMA.

PSEMA is the act for the regulation of the NTPS and HR administration and management of agencies established for government and public purposes.

Among other things, PSEMA sets out the powers, functions and responsibilities of the Commissioner for Public Employment and Chief Executives.

Through regulation, PSEMA sets out the principles of public administration and management, human resource management and conduct. These, together with the Code of Conduct (Employment Instruction Number 13), are intrinsic elements of the employment arrangements established by PSEMA.

Whilst the principles are expressed in general terms, they establish a framework that informs employees of their obligations and rights. At a different level, the principles also constitute a set of standards against which agency HR policies, procedures and other initiatives can be measured.

Similarly, the Code of Conduct provides specific guidance on a range of ethical and practical issues that may impact on employees during their service to the NT community. NTPS employees are in a rare position of trust requiring standards of behaviour that reflect community expectations.

The principles and Code of Conduct are part of the terms and conditions of the employment relationship. As such they are binding on all employees and must be observed by all, including Chief Executives and the Commissioner for Public Employment.

The principles and the Code of Conduct inform the focus of research of the survey including the concepts of community service and fairness; accountable for actions and performance; employment based on merit; application for employment open to all; managing performance; equity in employment; flexible workplace; fair internal review system; rewarding workplace; apolitical, impartial and ethical; quality leadership; discrimination-free and diversity recognised; employee consultation and input recognised; and safe workplace.

It should be noted that not all public servants are bound by PSEMA (including, sworn police officers, public prosecutors, the judiciary and the heads of statutory authorities).

SURVEY METHODOLOGYThe People Matter Survey was developed by the Victorian State Service Authority (now the Victorian Public Sector Commission) and represents the most widely adopted survey instrument amongst the various state and territory jurisdictions. The standard People Matter Survey instrument has been revised to meet the needs of the NTPS and in particular to assess performance against the NTPS Values PSEMA General Principles and Code of Conduct.2

The People Matter Survey seeks the opinions of public sector employees about the performance of their organisation in terms of organisational culture, values and well-being.

The survey asks questions about:

- change management

- employee engagement

- workplace well-being

- job satisfaction

- service delivery

- leadership

- team work

- personal accountability

- communication (including feedback)

- extent to which behaviours, such as fairness and respect, are valued in the workplace.

2 In 2016, the survey questions informing measurement of the NTPS Values and Principles will be reviewed and potentially refined through the addition of further questions.

110

3 | B

AC

KG

RO

UN

D



03 | BACKGROUND

Essentially, the survey provides employees with an opportunity to tell senior managers what it is like to work in their organisation, with additional benefit accruing to OCPE which uses whole-of-sector data to inform the direction of workforce planning as well as reporting obligations to the Minister for Public Employment.

The survey is comprised of several types of questions and can be viewed in its entirety in Appendix 3.

Although the survey collects data from individuals, this is collated and stored within a secure server that can only report data in an aggregated form. For example, reports were produced which provided the average scores for all questions relating to the NTPS Values and PSEMA Principles, as answered by a number of demographic sub-groups, giving a snapshot of the average experience of those identifying as belonging to these groups. Where there were less than 10 respondents matching the search query, business rules precluded the generation of a report. This prevents access to data pertaining to individuals or small groups; safeguarding participant privacy.

While many survey questions are similar to those used in the Public Sector Employee Surveys of 2011 and 2009, the order of the questions and the way in which indices are grouped varies substantially.

In accordance with best practice, direct comparisons are generally only made where the item or category content is identical. There were some exceptions made in areas where it was considered that the historical comparison data was of such significance that it is referenced alongside the 2014 data, despite minor changes in wording.

In terms of predicting trends since the survey was introduced, the adoption of a new instrument largely frustrates this, however, where comparisons were possible it was generally observed that participant responses have generally remained consistent.

SCORING OF RESPONSESThe primary score used to report employees’ confidence in the application of the concepts is the percentage of employees who agreed or strongly agreed with the statements regarding the concepts. For example, the percentage agreement score for the statement ‘I view my agency as an employer of choice’ is 80 per cent, indicating that 80 per cent of employees answered either ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ with this particular statement. It should be noted that this result does not mean that 20 per cent of employees disagreed – for this particular statement, 13 per cent of employees answered ‘neither agree nor disagree’ and seven per cent of employees answered ‘disagree’ or ‘strongly disagree’. Employees who provided a neutral response (‘neither agree nor disagree’ or ‘don’t know’, depending on the question) are not included in calculations of the percentage agreement score.

The agree/disagree statements in the survey were sorted into the following six categories:

- NTPS Values and PSEMA Principles

- Work Environment

- Job Satisfaction and engagement

- Management

- Bullying

- Feedback and talking performance

Each of these categories represents a concept that is either central to agency obligations under PSEMA or which explore a particular aspect of organisational practice that is significant to its effective operation. It is important to note that a small number of agencies are not governed by PSEMA but rather their own act. In such cases it should be considered that the PSEMA Principles are indicative of good administrative practice rather than adherence to this legislation.

Please note, the numerical values presented have been rounded to the nearest integer. These may, therefore, differ from the actual value by up to 0.49%. This does not affect the results in any meaningful way and has simply been introduced to improve their legibility.

12

03

| BA

CK

GR

OU

ND



03 | BACKGROUND

The bulk of this report is structured around these six concepts, with each having its own section. An overview of performance in each area is presented in the Summary Findings. Results for multiple choice questions are shown in stacked bar charts that use ‘temperature’ to indicate percentage agreement scores. The following example shows how such charts are to be read.

Job Satisfaction

Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Satisfied Very satisfied

Opportunities for development

Pay/remuneration

Job security

Relationship with people in my workgroup

Relationship with manager

Ability to work on own initiative

Interesting/challenging work provided

Working environment

Work-life balance

Overall job satisfaction

Leve

l of s

atis

fact

ion

x% Percentage Agreement

Neutral response

Disagree/ Strongly Disagree

Percentage Agreement

47%

58%

65%

77%

71%

81%

75%

67%

61%

69%



SUMMARY RESULTSResponse Rate 14

Profile of Response Sample 18

NTPS Values and PSEMA Principles 21

Work Environment 23

Job Satisfaction and Engagement 24-25

Management Indices 26

Bullying 30

Feedback and Talking Performance 35

Performance Management 36

14

04

| SUM

MA

RY

FIN

DIN

GS



04 | SUMMARY FINDINGS

RESPONSE RATEOf the 20,000 NTPS employees invited to participate in the survey, 7,877 completed responses were received. This equates to a response rate of 38 per cent. This response rate in 2011 was 31 per cent and a 25 per cent in 2009.

Survey invitations were emailed to employees in each agency who had a current employment contract at the date the survey was conducted. This included those who had a current employment contract in place but who may not have been at work at the time of the survey. A letter was sent from the Commissioner for Public Employment to 971 casual employees who were actively employed within the NTPS in the 2 months leading up to the survey. This letter outlined arrangements for employees to access the survey from home or office.

From a statistical point of view, and given the very large and diverse workforce that was being targeted, 38 per cent can be regarded as a good response rate.

The response rates for individual agencies are shown in Figure 2.1. Although not universally the case, response rates tended to be higher for the smaller agencies and lower for the larger agencies. This is a similar pattern to the 2009 and 2011 results and is

a typical finding for employee surveys. Ombudsman NT, OCPE and the Northern Territory Electoral Commission produced the highest response rates with 100 per cent of employees participating, while the lowest response rates were reported by the Department of Education, Department of Health and Power and Water Corporation.

As is shown in the following section, the demographic profile of the employees who completed the survey matches the demographic profile of the overall workforce - as captured in the 2014 State of the Service Report. Given the strong response rate and the representativeness of the survey sample (as explored in Chapter 3), the results can be assumed to represent the broader NTPS population with an accuracy of +/- five per cent. Given this assumption, the response rate of 38 per cent for the overall NTPS provides a very small margin of error of ±one per cent; that is, the true scores for the whole sector can be confidently assumed to be within a range of one per cent lower and one per cent higher than the scores presented in this report.


150

4 | SU

MM

AR

Y F

IND

ING

S



FIGURE 4.1: Response rates for the NTPS workforce and individual agencies - with comparison to previous years where available*

* Due to machinery of government changes, not all agencies existed in a comparable form in 2009 and/or 2011.

Aboriginal Areas Protection

Auditor General’s Office

Darwin Port Corporation

Department of Arts and Museum

Department of Attorney-General and Justice

Department of Business

Department of Children and Families

Department of Community Services

Department of Corporate and Information Services

Department of Correctional Services

Department of Education

Department of Health

Department of Housing

Department of Infrastructure

Department of Land Resource Management

Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment

Department of Local Government and Regions

Department of Mines and Energy

Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries

Department of Sport, Recreation and Racing

Department of the Chief Minister

Department of the Legislative Assembly

Department of Transport

Department of Treasury and Finance

Northern Territory Electoral Commission

Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment

Office of the Ombudsman

Parks Wildlife Commission of the Northern Territory

Police Officers

Police, Fire and Emergency Services (excluding Police Officers)

Power and Water Corporation

Territory Generation

Tourism NT

NTPS Average/Total

47%31%

100%20%

63%46%

43%

66%

66%30%

66%35%39%

47%38%

76%

64%

40%

28%23%

18%25%

30%

52%

61%

68%

55%

100%

78%

66%

80%

61%45%

38%92%

64%48%

67%

61%69%

100%100%

83%

100%83%

91%60%

80%72%

74%

69%33%

29%

31%

0%

34%4% 22%

65%66%42%

38%31%

25%

2014

2011

2009

63%


16

04

| SUM

MA

RY

FIN

DIN

GS



FIGURE 4.2: Proportion of the overall workforce within each agency compared to the survey sample.

Department of Health

Department of Education

Police, Fire and Emergency Services (excluding Police Officers)

Power and Water Corporation

Department of Correctional Services

Department of Children and Families

Department of Corporate and Information Services

Police Officers

Department of Attorney-General and Justice

Department of Housing

Department of Infrastructure

Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries

Department of Business

Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment*

Department of the Chief Minister

Department of Transport

Parks Wildlife Commission of the Northern Territory

Department of Land Resource Management

Department of Community Services

Department of Treasury and Finance

Department of Mines and Energy

Department of Arts and Museum

Department of the Legislative Assembly

Darwin Port Corporation

Tourism NT

Department of Sport, Recreation and Racing

Department of Local Government and Regions

Aboriginal Areas Protection


Northern Territory Electoral Commission

Office of the Ombudsman

Auditor General’s Office

Territory Generation

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000

Survey Response

Workforce (2014 State of the Service)

1,5666,083

1,3114,257

4601,578

3601,057

389954

299647

397621

416515

302451

209396

217344

211308

208305

163291

131283

148282

209273

182251

86166

100163

123148

85136

34102

6298

4875

4455

3944

1526

3126

1113

612

45

110


170

4 | SU

MM

AR

Y F

IND

ING

S



FIGURE 4.3: Geographic distribution of respondents as a percentage of the response sample, compared to workforce profile.

* Workforce data (State of the Service) does not distinguish between Alice Springs Town and Region. In this chart both populations are combined under Alice Springs Town.

* Comparison of the survey response differs from the workforce profile (as measured in SoTS), this reflects on the relative strength (or weakness) of the response in that location.

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

Alice Springs Town*

Alice Springs Region*

Barkly Region

Darwin City (Including Palmerston)

Darwin Region Other

East Arnhem Region

Katherine Region

Outside the Northern Territory

Survey Response


4%

20%

4%

2%

2%

60%

65%

10%

2%

3%

4%

7%

7%

0%

0%

ARNHEM HIGHWAY

KAKADU

HIGHWAY

STUART

HIGHWAY

BUNTINE

HIGHWAY

VICTORIA

HIGHW

AY

CENTRAL

ARNHEM

ROAD

CARPENTARIA

HIGHWAY

TABLELAND

S

HIGH

WAY

BARKLY

HIGHWAY

PLENTY

HIGHWAY

STUA

RT

LASSETERHIGHWAY

TANAMI

ROAD

HIGH

WAY

NhulunbuyDarwin

TennantCreek

AliceSprings

Katherine

East ArnhemGreater Darwin

Region

Katherine

Barkly Region

Daly, Tiwis & West Arnhem

Alice Springs Region


18

04

| SUM

MA

RY

FIN

DIN

GS



0 20 40 60 80 100

PROFILE OF RESPONSE SAMPLEFIGURE 4.4: Comparison of the workforce profile against the survey sample profile for gender, age, disability, ATSI status, length of service and full-time/part-time status.

Female

Male

15-34

35-54

55+

ATSI

Prefer not to say

2 years or less

3-5 years

6-10 years

11-20 years

21+ years

2 years or less

3-5 years

6-10 years

11-20 years

21 years or more

Full-time

Part-time

Gen

der

Age

ATSI

Year

s in

the

NTP

SYe

ars i

n th

e A

genc

yEm

ploy

men

t St

atus

Disa

bilit

y

Response Sample


63%

63%

37%

37%

25%

29%

21%

21%

54%

50%

4%

1%

7%

1%

5%

35%

32%

23%

22%

20%

20%

15%

16%

7%

9%

24%

20%

22%

21%

14%

92%

89%

8%

11%


190

4 | SU

MM

AR

Y F

IND

ING

S



FIGURE 4.5: Comparison of the workforce profile against the survey sample profile by region, salary and employment type.

* Workforce data (State of the Service) does not distinguish between Alice Springs Town and Region. In this chart both populations are combined under Alice Springs Town.


Katherine Region

East Arnhem Region

Darwin Region Other


Barkly Region

Alice Springs Region*

Alice Springs Town*

$85,000 Plus

$65,000 - $84,999

<$45,000

Ongoing

Fixed term temporary

Executive contract

Casual

Don’t know

Empl

oym

ent C

ateg

ory

Sala

ryR

egio

n

Workforce (2014 State of the Service) Response Sample

7%

7%

0%

0%

2%

10%

65%

60%

2%

2%

20%

14%

4%

46%

28%

23%

3%

1%

0%

78%

70%

16%

24%

4%

3%

4%

3%

$45,000 - $64,999

2%

4%


20

04

| SUM

MA

RY

FIN

DIN

GS



FIGURE 4.6: Sample characteristics for place of birth, first language, ATSI background, disability, manager status, highest educational achievement and caring responsibilities.

* In 2014, respondents could select multiple dependents for the first time.

Born in Australia

Born overseas in a country where English is a primary language

Born overseas in other country

Don’t know

Yes

No

Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander

Non-Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander

Prefer not to say

Disability

Yes

Yes

No

Doctoral Degree level

Master Degree level

Graduate Diploma or Graduate Certificate level

Bachelor Degree level incl. honours degrees

Advanced Diploma or Diploma level

Certificate level, including trade

Year 12 or equivalent (VCE/Leaving certificate)

Less than year 12 or equivalent

Child or children

Elderly relative(s)

Disabled person(s)

Other relative

Any other person(s)

No caring responsibilities

More than one option chosen

Cou

ntry

of B

irth

2014 2011 2009

Lang

uage

ot

her t

han

Engl

ish

spok

en a

t ho

me?

ATSI

bac

kgro

und

Disability

Disability that restricts performing everyday activities and is longterm

Man

ager

Educ

atio

nC

arin

g re

spon

sibi

lity

(dep

ende

nts)

*

76%78%

79%

12%22%

21%

11%

0%

17%

83%

7%6%

5%

88%94%

95%

5%

4%5%5%

50%40%

41%

28%33%

35%

72%67%

65%

1%26%

23%

25%29%29%

10%

15%

14%12%

11%

15%12%12%

11%13%13%

8%9%11%

46%34%34%

10%2%2%

6%3%3%

4%

6%

45%58%58%

17%3%3%


210

4 | SU

MM

AR

Y F

IND

ING

S



NTPS VALUES AND PSEMA PRINCIPLES

Values enhance our existing ethical framework. In the Northern Territory this ethical framework is underpinned in our Public Sector Employment and Management Act and the Code of Conduct which in turn support resource management and service delivery. These values embody the behaviours that are expected of each of us within our workplaces and how we interact with others at work. Importantly, it is the discretion that one has in administering rules and legislation that rely not only on judgment, but on a person’s ethics and values.

NTPS values apply to any public sector employee regardless of:

§ Agency

§ Nature and level of employment

§ Employment status (permanent, temporary, casual, traineeship, apprenticeship)

§ Nature of organisation (administrative, public corporation, statutory authority, public school or hospital etc.)

Some public sector employees (e.g. health professionals, teachers, police and lawyers) are also bound by codes of conduct relevant to their profession. The NTPS values, Public Sector Employment and Management Act, Code of Conduct do not take precedence nor replace professional standards, but rather employees must have regard to their professional codes alongside NTPS Values, Code of Conduct and ethics.

FIGURE 4.7: Awareness of organisational policies and processes

84%of respondents

are aware of the NTPS Values

95%of respondents are aware of the Code of Conduct


22

04

| SUM

MA

RY

FIN

DIN

GS



FIGURE 4.8: Values and Principles

Generally, the data shows that the NTPS is performing in accordance with the PSEMA Employment Principles and the NTPS Values.

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

Strongly Disagree Disagree Don’t Know Agree Strongly Agree

Commitment to Service

Ethical practice

Diversity

Accountability

Respect

Leadership

Impartiality

Administration Management Principle

Human Resource Management Principle S5C[c] - Resolving issues fairly

Human Resource Management Principle S5D - Merit

Human Resource Management Principle S5E - Equal employment

Human Resource Principle S5F - Performance and conduct

Valu

es


87%

86%

87%

81%

85%

84%

71%

85%

70%

70%

87%

76%PSEM

A E

mpl

oym

ent P

rinc

iple

s


230

4 | SU

MM

AR

Y F

IND

ING

S



WORK ENVIRONMENTMost Public Sector employees spend a substantial portion of their lives at work, so it is not surprising that relationships formed between colleagues, managers and clients contributes significantly to the individual’s sense of social connection and wellbeing. NTPS leaders should look to create environments that are viewed by their employees as safe; an environment where appropriate and productive behaviours are encouraged.

Positive feelings about work can help employees to engage with the goals of their agency as well as to remain focussed and productive in times of change. The People Matter Survey Report includes three measures, (change management, employee commitment and workplace wellbeing) built from a range of questions relating to agency processes as well as employee perceptions of colleagues, managers and self. These measures provide a snapshot of how the workforce views work environments across the sector.

FIGURE 4.9: Work Environment

56%of respondents

agreeing that their agency manages

change effectively

76%of employees responded

positively to questions relating to their level

of commitment to their current workplace

89%of employees

indicated that their wellbeing

is sound


24

04

| SUM

MA

RY

FIN

DIN

GS



JOB SATISFACTION Research indicates that job satisfaction may be positively linked to an agency’s performance and negatively linked to absenteeism and employee turnover.

FIGURE 4.10: Job Satisfaction

26%of employees rarely think about leaving

their agencyThe NTPS promotes the idea of career

mobility, meaning this is not necessarily a reflection of dissatisfaction.

36%of respondents feel

their agency is an employer of choice,

with 46 per cent undecided

This may indicate significant potentials to promote the relative benefits of agencies, and

the sector in general, to employees.

at 70%overall job

satisfaction was good

however, there was some variability between agencies.

96%

Formal complaints and satisfaction with outcome:

Personally experienced bullying and submitted

a formal complaint

Were you satisfied with the way your formal complaint was handled?

4%

54% 7% 18% 21%


250

4 | SU

MM

AR

Y F

IND

ING

S



ENGAGEMENTThe engagement questions in the NTPS 2014 People Matter Survey indicate the extent to which staff are committed to their agency and its business or, conversely, have withdrawn from it.

Employee engagement is considered in human management literature to be a useful measure of a combination of concepts relating to advocacy, willingness to contribute to the goals of the agency, commitment and job satisfaction. The Victorian Public Sector Commission have tag-lined this collection of behaviours as ‘say, stay and strive’.

High engagement suggests increased potential for the organisation to deal with challenging times, such as change or increased complexity of work. Low engagement may indicate an increased risk of the various phenomena identified in the commentary about job satisfaction.

The employee engagement index provides an indication of employee commitment to the organisation’s goals and values and their motivation to contribute to the organisation’s success.

Australian Capital Territory

Public Sector

It is worth noting that (at the whole-of-sector level) employee engagement appears to be in balance with attested levels of job satisfaction and employee wellbeing. When engagement exceeds both satisfaction and wellbeing, performance demands on individuals may become unsustainable. This can lead to an acceleration of staff turnover which, in turn, affects productive output.

The issue of engagement is explored further in Chapter 5, where change management capability is identified as the key driver for employee engagement, followed by responsiveness, integrity and merit.

3 It is important to note that unlike other indices reported by People Matter, the Engagement Index does not reflect the a percentage agreement score, rather it is presents the mean average score. across the five engagement questions. Engagement index scores are also provided for a range of demographic sub-groups examined in Section 7 of this report.

4 The calculation of the NTPS Engagement Index presented here is calculated as an unweighted average across all NTPS agencies. Use of an unweighted average conforms with the standard practice across jurisdictions, although OCPE’s preference is for a weighted average(i.e. 64) and therefore this is used elsewhere in the report when engagement is discussed.

FIGURE 4.11: Engagement Index

When calculated as an average between agencies the Engagement Index3 score for the NTPS is

664

Jurisdictions with a comparable measure:

69 62 65 66

AustralianPublic Service

New South Wales Public Service

Victorian Public Sector


26

04

| SUM

MA

RY

FIN

DIN

GS



FIGURE 4.12: Management Indices

MANAGEMENT INDICES Some agreement questions have been grouped to summarise employee opinions about respondents’ agency, senior manager, immediate manager and their workgroup. The higher the score for each management cohort, the more positive the perception around their management abilities.

80%of respondents agreed

with statements attesting to management abilities

of their immediate manager

73%of respondents agreed

with statements attesting to management abilities

within their agency

82%of respondents agreed with

statements attesting to management abilities within their workgroup

56%of respondents

agreed with statements

attesting to management

abilities of their senior manager


270

4 | SU

MM

AR

Y F

IND

ING

S



Management indices results indicate that employees generally held the view that there is a good standard of management throughout their Agency.

There is a notable degree of consistency in management performance between the Workgroup, Immediate manager and Agency cohorts, however, Senior Managers scored substantially lower.

Confidence in the positive attributes of Senior Managers (56 per cent) reflects a strong reliance within the survey instrument on questions relating to change management with limited exploration of other senior management qualities. From 2016, additional questions will be added to provide a more rounded and accurate assessment of capabilities demonstrated by senior managers.

Views of management cohorts by demographic sub-groups

Figure 4.7 shows how management cohorts are viewed by different cohorts.

Apart from a universal low score for senior managers which shows some variability between cohorts (which is largely in accordance with their relative views on change management), there is a remarkable level of consistency in views across the demographic sub-groups with regard to managerial competencies in the NTPS.

Views on Workgroup, Immediate Manager and Agency cohorts are consistently above 80 per cent. This score drops markedly for Senior Managers, which reflects the generally poor score for questions relating to change management.

At 75 per cent, employees with a long-term disability have a less positive view of Agency-level management than their colleagues (whose assessments range from 80 – 85 per cent). This view is consistent with the profile of employees with a disability provided at Section 7.

96 percent of employees felt they make a contribution to achieving their agency’s goals.


28

04

| SUM

MA

RY

FIN

DIN

GS



FIGURE 4.13: Views on management by demographic group

Sector

Gen

der

Organisation Senior manager Immediate manager Workgroup

Female

Male

ATSI

Prefer not to say

Long term disability

15-34 years

35-54 years

55+ years

Manager

Not Manager

Non-ongoing

Ongoing

Any caring responsibility

ATSI

Sta

tus

Disability

Age

Man

agem

ent

stat

usEm

ploy

men

t Ty

pe

Caring responsibility

81%

86%84%

62%

82%64%

84%87%

80%59%

83%84%

80%66%

82%84%

70%43%

73%76%

75%48%

81%82%

84%68%

86%87%

80%60%

83%85%

82%61%

83%86%

84%63%

87%88%

80%62%

82%85%

85%71%

87%88%

80%62%

82%85%

81%63%

85%84%


290

4 | SU

MM

AR

Y F

IND

ING

S



Observations on management index groups

Agency

§ Percentage agreement scores were exceptionally positive for all statements concerning equal opportunity employment (87-92 per cent)

§ 96 per cent of respondents felt they make a contribution to achieving the agency’s objectives

§ 93 per cent of respondents agreed that their agency saw earning and sustaining high levels of public trust as important

§ 90 per cent of respondents agreed that there are opportunities within their agency to develop their skills and knowledge

§ 91 per cent of respondents agreed that their agency provides high quality services to the community

§ 60 per cent of respondents were confident that a grievance lodged within their agency would be investigated in a thorough and objective manner

§ 50 per cent of respondents agreed that they were provided with the opportunity to influence changes in their organisation

§ 61 per cent of respondents agreed that they rarely think about leaving their agency

§ 51 per cent agreed there is a clear consultation process when change in their organisation is proposed

Senior managers

§ Poor agreement levels with statements around the effectiveness of change management processes saw Senior Managers place at the bottom of all management groups

§ At 70 per cent, the percentage agreement score for the statement “Senior Managers model the NTPS Values” was lower than might be expected and indicates an issue which requires exploration

Immediate manager

§ Immediate managers scored well against all measures with percentage agreement scores for some statements standing out as being exceptionally positive

- “My manager encourages employees to behave in an ethical manner” (92 per cent)

- “My manager encourages employees to report health and safety incidents and hazards” ( 91 per cent)

- “My manager is committed to ensuring customers receive a high standard of service” (90 per cent)

Workgroup

§ While responses relating to management within an employee’s immediate workgroup were the most positive on average, percentage agreement scores for some questions indicate potential issues

- “In my workgroup, decisions about access to development opportunities are made on the basis of merit” (63 per cent)

90 percent of respondents agreed that there are opportunities within the agency to develop their skills and knowledge.


30

04

| SUM

MA

RY

FIN

DIN

GS



BULLYING

FIGURE 4.14: Experienced or witnessed bullying in past 12 months

22%of respondents

had experienced bullying in the

12 months prior to the survey

33%of respondents had witnessed bullying in the

12 months prior to the survey

52%of respondents who identified as having been

bullied described their experience as having an element of intimidation

43%of respondents who identified as having been

bullied described their experience as having an

element of exclusion or isolation


310

4 | SU

MM

AR

Y F

IND

ING

S



FIGURE 4.15: Experience of bullying by demographic sub-group

Respondents who experienced bullying were most likely to identify as being female (23 per cent), having a long term disability (31 per cent) and being Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander (26 per cent).

There was minimal difference between age groups or between ongoing and non-ongoing employees.

The breakdown of demographic sub-groups who witnessed bullying is similar to the profile of those who experienced bullying. Firstly, this may reflect that employee groups who are themselves more vulnerable to bullying are more likely to recognise particular incidents as being inappropriate based on a position of empathy. Secondly, the most vulnerable demographic sub-groups are less positive about their workplace in general. As explored in Section 7, demographic sub-groups which are in the minority, on average, less positive in their responses.

Female

Male


Non ATSI

Disability

Non-ongoing

Ongoing

15-34 years

35-54 years

55+ years

Yes

Not Sure

No23%

19%

26%

21%

31%

20%

22%

19%

23%

22%


32

04

| SUM

MA

RY

FIN

DIN

GS



FIGURE 4.16: Witnessed bullying by demographic sub-group

» Sources of bullying were identified by respondents in the following order:

Female

Male


Non ATSI

Disability

Non-ongoing

Ongoing

15-34 years

35-54 years

55+ years

35%

31%

40%

32%

41%

27%

35%

30%

35%

34%

Yes

No

31%Senior managers

29%Immediate manager

12%Prefer not to specify

8%Group of fellow workers

29%Fellow worker

7%Subordinate

4%Client/customer

3%Member of the public

Figure 4.9, shows the comparative bullying-source profiles for vulnerable demographic sub-groups.


330

4 | SU

MM

AR

Y F

IND

ING

S



» Male and ongoing employees are more likely to be bullied by a senior manager

» Female, ATSI, non-ongoing and employees with a disability are more likely to be bullied by a fellow worker

» Employees over 55 years of age are equally likely to be bullied by a senior manager, immediate manager or fellow worker.

FIGURE 4.17: Sources of bullying - as experienced by demographic sub-groups

Senior manager

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Immediate manager

Fellow worker

Group of fellow workers

Subordinate

Prefer not to specify

Member of the public

Client/customer

Female Male Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander Prefer not to say

Disabled - Yes Non-ongoing Ongoing 55+ years


34

04

| SUM

MA

RY

FIN

DIN

GS



Comparison to other jurisdictions

FIGURE 4.18: Experienced bullying by jurisdiction

Experienced bullying in the last 12 months (standard method)

Experienced bullying in the last 12 months (method 2)

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

NSW Qld ACT NT Tas Vic APS WA

There are two valid approaches for calculating and presenting the rate of bullying across the public sector.

Method 1 (‘standard approach’): An average across the sector is calculated by firstly obtaining the bullying rate for each agency before establishing a mean percentage across all agencies. There is no weighting based on the number of employees within each agency, meaning that large agencies (which generally report higher levels of bullying) do not overly influence the results. This approach is useful for individual agencies who are looking to compare their results against the average within their jurisdiction, however, in considering the issue on a whole-of-sector level, this approach is less accurate than a weighted approach.

Method 2: The average is calculated based on the total number of individual responses across the sector. OCPE feels this more accurately reflects the rate of bullying across the sector as a whole and is more appropriate for cross-jurisdictional comparison.

23% 23%

20%

19%

22%

19% 19%

17%

10%


350

4 | SU

MM

AR

Y F

IND

ING

S



65%of employees report that they receive effective feedback

FIGURE 4.19: Feedback and Talking PerformanceFEEDBACK AND TALKING PERFORMANCEWhile formal feedback is an important part of performance planning and performance management, the infrequency of such discussions, which are generally limited to once or twice a year, mean that they are rarely sufficient, on their own, to guide or support an employee in their professional development. Informal feedback – should, ideally, supplement more formal conversations.

For the purpose of this report, feedback is assumed to be effective when it includes either formal and informal conversations or informal conversations only. Formal feedback only, or no feedback, are categorised as ‘other’. That is not to say that formal feedback on its own is ineffective but rather that is suboptimal.

The measure ‘talking performance’ is separate to feedback and refers to the nature of the conversation between the employee and manager. Effective performance talks are those that cover both what the employee is doing well and what they could do to improve performance, or simply what the employee is doing well. In the case of ‘talking performance, ‘other’ reflects conversations where the focus is solely on the need for improvement, or where no conversation takes place.


36

04

| SUM

MA

RY

FIN

DIN

GS



74%of employees are aware that their agencies have a performance management system in place

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENTManaging employees’ work performance is critical to achieving agency objectives and a responsibility of all managerial or supervisory jobs in the NTPS.

Performance management is covered by PSEMA sections 24(f), 24(g) and 28(g) and Employment Instruction Number Four. All Agencies are required to have Performance Management Systems in place. When reporting in response to a request from OCPE for collation of 2014-15 State of the Service Report, 93 per cent of agencies indicated that they have implemented a performance management system in all business areas. In addition, 64 per cent reported having a reliable monitoring system in place to verify that all supervisors/managers are providing formal performance feedback to staff at least annually. These figures may be optimistic given the results of the NTPS 2014 People Matter Survey.

FIGURE 4.20: Employees with a current performance plan in place

44%of employees report having a current performance plan in place

The engagement index score for employees without a performance agreement was 56, ten points lower than the NTPS average.

37

INFORMING PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENTS



Employee Engagement: Driving Productivity 38

38

05

| OP

PO

RT

UN

ITIE

S FO

R IM

PR

OV

ED

PE

RF

OR

MA

NC

E



EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT: DRIVING PRODUCTIVITYChapter 5 outlines the main findings of an analysis conducted to identify key drivers of employee engagement in the NTPS, as identified through data from the 2014 NTPS People Matter Survey.

This report has identified drivers of employee engagement in the NT public sector, with change management capability identified as the key driver, followed by responsiveness, integrity and merit. Key driver analysis provides insights for decision makers looking to improve or maintain engagement levels and potentially achieve higher organisation performance.

Measuring employee engagement

Employee engagement can be defined as: “a positive attitude held by the employee towards the organisation and its values. An engaged employee is aware of the business context, and works with colleagues to improve performance within the job for the benefit of the organisation. The organisation must work to develop and nurture engagement, which requires a two-way relationship between employee and employer”5

The 2015 NTPS measures employee engagement using five questions. These are the same questions used by the UK government to measure the Civil Service’s employee engagement. These questions were developed from reviews of academic literature on employee engagement as well as consultations with analysts, managers and HR practitioners across the UK Civil Service. The questions and their rationale are presented in Table 5.1.

05 | OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVED PERFORMANCE

5 Robinson, D., Perryman, S. and Hayday,S. (2004). The Drivers of Employee Engagement. Institute of Employment Studies, Report 408.

Table 5.1: Engagement questions and their rationale

Engagement questionsAspect measured Rationale

I am proud to tell others I work for my organisation

Pride An engaged employee feels proud to be associated with their organisation, by feeling part of it rather than just “working for” it

I would recommend my organisation as a good place to work

Advocacy An engaged employee will be an advocate of their organisation and the way it works

I feel a strong personal attachment to my organisation

Attachment An engaged employee has a strong, and emotional, sense of belonging to their organisation

My organisation inspires me to do the best in my job

Inspiration An engaged employee will contribute their best, and it is important that their organisation plays a role in inspiring this

My organisation motivates me to help achieve its objectives

Motivation An engaged employee is committed to ensuring their organisation is successful in what it sets out to do

Source: Cabined Office (2013). Civil Service People Survey 2012 – Summary of Findings. Page 8.. Also at http://resources.civilservice.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/csps2012_summary-of-findings_final.pdf. Accessed 14 January 2015.


390

5 | O

PP

OR

TU

NIT

IES F

OR

IMP

RO

VE

D P

ER

FO

RM

AN

CE



These questions are also used in public sector employee surveys conducted by other Australian jurisdictions including Victoria, New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory and the Australian Public Service.

The questions use a five-point agreement scale. An engagement score is calculated for each question where strongly disagree is assigned a score of 0, disagree a score of 25, neither agree nor disagree a score of 50, agree a score of 75 and strongly agree a score of 100. An engagement index is then calculated from the average score of the five engagement questions. The engagement index has values between 0 and 100.

Overall results

Table 5.2 presents results for each of the five engagement questions and the five-question average from the NTPS. The highest engagement score of 68 was achieved for the question ‘I am proud to tell others I work for my agency’, which is consistent with the high proportion of respondents (80 per cent) who believe that their agency is an employer of choice.

The lowest engagement score of 60 was achieved for the question ‘My agency motivates me to help achieve its objectives’.

The average engagement score, the engagement index, for all five questions is 64 .6

6 Calculated as an average of all respondents. If the same methodology as other jurisdictions is used (i.e. an average across agencies) the Engagement Index score is actually 66.

Table 5.2: Engagement questions – Survey results for the NTPS

Proportion of responses

Engagement questionsStrongly disagree Disagree

Neither agree nor disagree Agree

Strongly Agree

Engagement score

I am proud to tell others I work for my agency 4 8 22 44 23 68

I would recommend my agency as a good place to work 6 10 21 44 19 65

I feel a strong personal attachment to my agency 5 10 27 38 20 65

My agency inspires me to do the best in my job 7 13 29 35 17 61

My agency motivates me to help achieve its objectives 6 13 30 35 15 60

Average (all five questions) 6 11 26 39 19 64

*The engagement score is the average score calculated where “Strongly disagree” has been assigned a score of 0, “Disagree” a score of 25, “Neither agree nor disagree” a score of 50, “Agree” a score of 75 and “Strongly agree” a score of 100


40

05

| OP

PO

RT

UN

ITIE

S FO

R IM

PR

OV

ED

PE

RF

OR

MA

NC

E



Key driver analysis

The People Matter Survey is not an employee engagement survey. The Survey measures employee engagement levels, but it has not been designed using an employee engagement analytical framework. This means that the survey does not collect information on all the relevant work environment aspects which would be theoretically required to properly explain engagement. This does not mean, however, that the survey cannot provide insights to understand and identify drivers of employee engagement. In fact, the analysis in this section will show that, although information on some key work environment aspects required for a more comprehensive understanding of employee engagement may be missing, data collected by the survey are capable of identifying some key drivers of employee engagement in the NT public sector with a good level of statistical confidence. Identifying drivers of engagement could assist decision makers to know how to improve or maintain engagement levels which, in turn, could improve their organisation performance.

Organisational culture measures (i.e. survey questions measuring application of the NTPS Values, PSEMA Principles and other work environment aspects) were used for the analysis. Exploratory Factor Analysis and regression analysis were the main tools. Exploratory Factor Analysis was particularly useful for analysing the impact of organisational culture as it allowed the reduction of the large number of survey items measuring organisational culture into a more manageable group of factors. These factors were used to identify key drivers of employee engagement in the NTPS through regression analysis.

Exploratory factor analysis

Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to identify the structure underlying the set of 2014 People Matter Survey questions used to measure organisation culture in the NT public sector. A total of 59 questions using a four-point agreement scale (strongly disagree, disagree, agree and strongly agree) were used for this analysis.

The exploratory factor analysis solution identified eight factors grouping a total of 51 individual questions. The size of the factor groups varies from

a minimum of four to a maximum of 12 questions. A total of eight questions were dropped from the analysis because they did not have any significant loadings or they loaded significantly on more than one factor.

Based on the topical area of the questions grouped under each factor, these factors have been given the following names: change management, EEO, integrity, merit, my contribution, my manager, OH&S, and responsiveness.

Identifying key drivers of employee engagement

Regression analysis was used to identify key drivers of employee engagement. The eight factors identified through exploratory factor analysis were used as explanatory variables. Results showed that the regression model had an explanatory power (‘R-squared’7) of 59 per cent, which is a good level of explanatory capability.

Table 5.3 shows the regression analysis results identifying the key drivers of employee engagement in the NT public sector. Change management (leadership), followed by responsiveness, integrity and merit, are the most important contributors to employee engagement8. Thus, any strategy to increase employee engagement in the NTPS or its agencies should focus on improving these aspects, particularly change management (leadership) which is the most important key driver. The change management factor is made up of the following Survey items:

§ Communications about change from senior managers are timely and relevant

§ In times of change, senior managers provide sufficient information about the purpose of the changes

§ There is a clear consultation process when change in my agency is proposed

§ I am provided with the opportunity to influence changes in my agency.

7 A measure of the coefficent of determination for multiple regression, indicating the how closely the data fits the regression line.8 Note that the UK Civil Service People Survey has consistently shown, since 2009, that leadership and change management is also the most important

contributor to employee engagement in the UK civil service (see, for example, Cabinet Office, 2013). Similarly, regression analysis using Victorian public sector data also shows that leadership and change management is the most important predictor of employee engagement in the Victorian public sector.


410

5 | O

PP

OR

TU

NIT

IES F

OR

IMP

RO

VE

D P

ER

FO

RM

AN

CE



Table 5.3: Key drivers of employee engagement in the NT public sector

Key driversStandardised (Beta)

regression coefficients9

Change management 0.27

Responsiveness 0.16

Integrity 0.12

Merit 0.11

EEO 0.09

My contribution 0.08

My manager 0.07

OHS 0.06

Based on the findings presented above, it could be argued that any strategy to increase employee engagement in the NTPS should focus, largely, on improving change management.

For the purpose of the factor analysis, ‘change management’ only includes measures that relate to leadership abilities or actions. In that sense, this differs from change management as measured in the summary findings section of this report (which includes an additional question in which respondent were asked if they acknowledged their own responsibilities to co-workers during times of change.

In comparing results between these different change management factors it is clear that while individual employees have a strong understanding of their responsibility to assist their fellow workers during times of change, there is a substantially less positive view when it comes to assessing management capabilities/actions in this area.

Views across demographic sub-groups

Figure 5.1 shows that there are a range of change management views across demographic sub-groups, however these all fall short of achieving what might reasonably be termed a positive response; which is an average of 80 per cent and above.

Of the demographic sub-groups analysed in the production of this report, employees with disability were the least satisfied with change management processes over the preceding twelve months; being 12 percentage points below the mean average for the sector. At the other end of the response scale, non-ongoing employees were considerably more positive in their views on change management; being 8 percentage points above the mean average for the sector.

In conjunction with the demographic sub-group profiles at Section 7, Figure 5.1 highlights that those demographic sub-groups who are in a minority, are likely to require specific actions and interventions to improve. It is important to be mindful that, at its most effective, engagement is a voluntary process through which effective skills, capabilities and behaviours and practiced in a way that supports common goals and purposes.

9 Standardised (Beta) coefficients are used to measure the individual contribution of each explanatory variable towards explaining employee engagement. Standardised (Beta) coefficients measure changes in standard deviation units. Thus, the Beta coefficient for change management (leadership) can be interpreted as follows: a one unit change in the change management (leadership) score (meaning a one standard deviation change in change management) would change the engagement index by 0.27 (meaning 0.27 standard deviations), whereas a one unit change in the EEO score (meaning a one standard deviation change in EEO) would change the engagement index by 0.09 (meaning 0.09 standard deviations). Thus, the effect of change management (leadership) on engagement is much larger than the effect of EEO on engagement.


42

05

| OP

PO

RT

UN

ITIE

S FO

R IM

PR

OV

ED

PE

RF

OR

MA

NC

E



FIGURE 5.1: Change management views ranked by employee group

Disability

Male

35-54 years

Permanent

55+ years

Non ATSI

Female

ATSI

15-34 years

Non-ongoing

Sector

Overall

There is a clear consultation process when change in my

agency is proposed

In times of change, senior managers provide sufficient

information about the purpose of the changes

In times of change, I have an obligation to help my work

colleagues understand and adapt to the new ways of working

I am provided with the opportunity to influence changes in my agency

Communications about change from senior

managers are timely and relevant

49%58%

59%

61%59%

61%63%

65%64%

69%61%

38%48%48%

52%49%

52%53%

57%58%

62%51%

40%51%

53%

55%54%

56%58%

62%62%

66%56%

88%90%

91%

93%91%

92%92%

91%88%

92%91%

41%47%

49%

50%48%

51%52%

54%54%

60%50%

39%51%

52%

54%52%

55%57%

62%59%

65%55%


430

5 | O

PP

OR

TU

NIT

IES F

OR

IMP

RO

VE

D P

ER

FO

RM

AN

CE



Performance Management

It is also important to note the importance of performance management in building engagement. Figure 5.2 demonstrates how each of the questions that comprise the Engagement Index compare between employees who either do or do not have a Performance Plan.

FIGURE 5.2: Engagement Index by Performance Planning

Furthermore, a comparison of performance management against a range of measures, including employee experience, level of satisfaction, employee wellbeing and awareness of key managerial practices, shows that the difference between those with and without a performance plan is striking.

Performance plan No performance plan



I feel a strong personal attachment to my

organisation


I would recommend my organisation as a good place

to work

55%

66%

54%

66%

61%

69%

64%

73%

60%

70%


44

05

| OP

PO

RT

UN

ITIE

S FO

R IM

PR

OV

ED

PE

RF

OR

MA

NC

E



FIGURE 5.3: Performance management experience against empoyee experience, job satisfaction, wellbeing and view of managerial decision-making

Performance plan No performance plan

In my workgroup, work is undertaken using best practice approaches

In my workplace, decisions are made fairly, objectively and ethically

My performance is assessed against clear criteria

I feel I make a contribution to achieving the organisation’s objectives

I am provided with the opportunity to work to my full potential


Pay/remuneration

Job security





Working environment

Work-life balance


My agency has a formal performance management system

The performance feedback has been beneficial to my ongoing development

My manager has talked to me about what I am doing well in my work

My manager has talked to me about what I could do to improve my performance

I have received formal feedback on individual performance

I have received informal feedback on individual performance

98%

Commit. to

Service

W’p

lace

w

ellb

eing

Ethical practice

Admin Mgmt

Principle

Leve

l of s

atis

fact

ion

Your

exp

erie

nces

89%

76%

83%

69%

84%

54%

95%

84%

71%

57%

37%

64%

53%

72%

60%

83%

72%

80%

63%

87%

75%

82%

69%

75%

60%

67%

56%

77%

62%

93%

64%

73%

28%

82%

46%

75%

33%

67%

17%

79%

51%

45

DETAILED RESULTS



Values 46

Job Satisfaction and Engagement 50

Your Experiences 51

Working-Life Intentions 52

Bullying 53

46

06

| DE

TAILE

D R

ESU

LTS



This section of the report presents results for each individual survey item. Detailed results allow the investigation of themes outside of the assigned headings (e.g., personal accountability, perceptions of how supportive the NTPS is, satisfaction/agreement with the job characteristics) which can only be performed by looking at the detailed results.

To interpret results for 2014, it is important to consider all of the information provided for each question and not just a component in isolation.

VALUESFIGURE 6.1: Agreement with adherence to NTPS Values

06 | DETAILED RESULTS


In my workplace, we use feedback from our customers/clients/stakeholders to improve the services we deliver

In my workplace, work is undertaken using best practice approaches

My agency provides high quality services to the Northern Territory community

My manager is committed to ensuring customers receive a high standard of service

My workplace strives to achieve customer satisfaction

Employees in my agency behave in an ethical manner

I am confident that I would be protected from reprisal for reporting improper conduct

In my agency, earning and sustaining a high level of public trust is seen as important

In my agency, there are procedures and systems designed to prevent employees engaging in improper conduct


My manager encourages employees to avoid conflicts of interest

My manager encourages employees to behave in an ethical manner

People in my workplace are honest, open and transparent in their dealings

People in my workplace do not use confidential information gained at work for personal use

Com

mit

men

t to

Serv

ice


77%81%90%88%89%

85%64%89%83%73%82%90%74%82%

81%84%71%80%85%77%77%60%

67%73%77%82%

99%92%70%83%74%

92%65%78%65%68%

55%73%

Ethi

cal p

ract

ice

Div

ersi

ty

Age is not a barrier to success in my agency

Cultural background is not a barrier to success in my agency

Disability is not a barrier to success in my agency

Equal Employment Opportunity is provided in my agency

Gender is not a barrier to success in my agency

Having family responsibilities is not a barrier to success in my agency

My agency is committed to creating a diverse workforce (e.g. age, gender, cultural background)

Working part-time or using other flexible work options is not a barrier to success in my agency

In my agency there are clear procedures and processes for resolving grievances



My manager encourages employees to avoid conflicts of interestAcco

unta

bilit

y

I provide help and support to other people in my workplace

I receive help and support from other people in my workplace

My input is adequately sought and considered about decisions that directly affect me

My manager treats employees with dignity and respect

There is a good team spirit in my workplace

Res

pect

I encourage people in my workplace to act in ways that are consistent with the values

In my agency behaviour consistent with the values is acknowledged

My manager actively discourages behaviours that are inconsistent with the values

Senior managers model the Code of Conduct and Ethics General Order

Senior managers model the NTPS values

Lead

ersh

ip

I am confident that if I lodge a grievance in my agency, it would be investigated in a thorough and objective manner

In my workplace, decisions are made fairly, objectively and ethicallyImpartiality

Valu

es


470

6 | D

ETA

ILED

RE

SULT

S



FIGURE 6.2: Agreement with adherence to PSEMA Employment Principles


Adm

inis

trat

ion

Man

agem

ent P

rinc

iple


89%

83%

56%

74%

82%

55%

46%

74%

67%

51%

74%

56%

62%

56%

81%

84%

71%

80%

85%

77%

77%

60%

64%

70%

72%

70%

74%

71%

74%

83%






I am confident that if I lodge a grievance in my agency, it would be investigated in a thorough and objective manner

I feel confident that if I lodge a grievance, I will not suffer any negative consequences

I would be confident in approaching my manager to discuss concerns and grievances

In my agency there are clear procedures and processes for resolving grievances

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent P

rincip

le

S5C[

c] -

Reso

lvin

g iss

ues f

airly

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent P

rinc

iple

S5

D -

Mer

it

In my workplace, decisions about access to development opportunities are made on the basis of merit

My agency has policies that require recruitment of employees on the basis of merit


My workplace selects people with the right knowledge, skills and abilities to fill job vacancies

Recruitment & promotion decisions in this workplace are fair and based on merit

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

Prin

cipl

e S5

E -

Equa

l em

ploy

men

t Age is not a barrier to success in my agency








Hum

an R

esou

rce

Prin

cipl

e S5

F -

Perf

orm

ance

and

con

duct


In my agency, employment arrangements are available to help employees achieve a work-life balance

In my agency, there are opportunities for me to develop my skills and knowledge


My manager involves me in decisions about my work

My manager is good at managing people

My manager keeps the people in my workplace informed about what is going on


PSEM

A E

mpl

oym

ent P

rinc

iple

s


48

06

| DE

TAILE

D R

ESU

LTS



FIGURE 6.3: Agreement with statements relating to work environment


I am encouraged to report health and safety incidents and injuries


I feel I make a contribution to achieving the agency’s objectives

I have enough work to keep me busyWor

kpla

ce w

ellb

eing


89%

76%

94%

96%

65%

73%

84%

58%

72%

82%

84%

84%

50%

46%

85%

51%

46%

Empl

oyee

com

mit

men

t

At present, I do not feel overly stressed at work

Employees in my workplace are provided with effective induction and orientation

Employees in my workplace display good occupational health and safety awareness

I rarely think about leaving this agency

I view my agency as an employer of choice

My manager ensures the occupational health and safety guidelines for my work place are followed

My manager encourages employees to report health and safety incidents and hazards

My workplace is committed to employee health and safety

Cha

nge

man

agem

ent

Communications about change from senior managers are timely and relevant


In times of change, I have an obligation to help my work colleagues understand and adapt to the new ways of working

In times of change, senior managers provide sufficient information about the purpose of the changes

There is a clear consultation process when change in my agency is proposed


490

6 | D

ETA

ILED

RE

SULT

S



FIGURE 6.4: Confidence in Workgroup and Management

Strongly Disagree Disagree Don’t Know Agree Strongly AgreePercentage Agreement

81%

84%

71%

80%

85%

55%

46%

94%

58%

72%

65%

67%

89%

70%

72%

83%

74%

77%

90%

46%

50%

51%

68%

65%

74%

82%

78%

90%

84%

74%

88%

71%

74%

83%

92%

99%

92%

51%

81%

89%

74%

74%

Age

ncy

Seni

or

man

ager

Imm

edia

te m

anag

erW

orkg

roup

Age is not a barrier to success in my organisation

Cultural background is not a barrier to success in my organisation

Disability is not a barrier to success in my organisation

Equal Employment Opportunity is provided in my organisation

Gender is not a barrier to success in my organisation

I am confident that if I lodge a grievance in my organisation, it would be investigated in a thorough and objective manner

I am provided with the opportunity to influence changes in my organisation

I feel I make a contribution to achieving the organisation’s objectives

I rarely think about leaving this organisation

I view my organisation as an employer of choice

In my organisation behaviour consistent with the values is acknowledged

In my organisation there are clear procedures and processes for resolving grievances

In my organisation, earning and sustaining a high level of public trust is seen as important

In my organisation, employment arrangements are available to help employees achieve a work-life balance

In my organisation, there are opportunities for me to develop my skills and knowledge

In my organisation, there are procedures and systems designed to prevent employees engaging in improper conduct

My organisation has policies that require recruitment of employees on the basis of merit

My organisation is committed to creating a diverse workforce (e.g. age, gender, cultural background)

My organisation provides high quality services to the Victorian community

There is a clear consultation process when change in my organisation is proposed




Senior managers model the values











I encourage people in my workgroup to act in ways that are consistent with the values

I provide help and support to other people in my workgroup

I receive help and support from other people in my workgroup

In my workgroup, decisions about access to development opportunities are made on the basis of merit

In my workgroup, work is undertaken using best practice approaches

My workgroup strives to achieve customer satisfaction

People in my workgroup are honest, open and transparent in their dealings

There is a good team spirit in my workgroup


50

06

| DE

TAILE

D R

ESU

LTS



JOB SATISFACTION AND ENGAGEMENTFIGURE 6.5: Job Satisfaction

FIGURE 6.6: Engagement Index

Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Satisfied Very satisfied


Pay/remuneration

Job security





Working environment

Work-life balance


I would recommend my organisation as a good place to work


I feel a strong personal attachment to my organisation



Valu

es

Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree


47%

58%

65%

77%

71%

81%

75%

67%

61%

69%


65%

68%

65%

60%

61%


510

6 | D

ETA

ILED

RE

SULT

S



YOUR EXPERIENCESFIGURE 6.7: Effective feedback

No Don’t Know Yes

I believe my agency will take action as a result of this survey

I have a current performance agreement in place

My agency has a formal performance management system

The performance feedback has been beneficial to my ongoing development

My manager has talked to me about what I am doing well in my work

My manager has talked to me about what I could do to improve my performance

I have received formal feedback on individual performance

I have received informal feedback on individual performance

AWARENESS OF ORGANISATIONAL POLICIES AND PROCESSESFIGURE 6.8: Awareness of organisational policies and processes

No Yes

I am

aw

are

of:

The NTPS Code of Conduct

The NTPS Values

My organisation’s programs to support employee wellbeing

(i.e. Employee Assistance Program or equivalent)

95%

84%

75%

30%

5%

16%

25%

41% 29%

47% 9% 44%

9% 15% 76%

35% 17% 48%

35% 2% 63%

45% 3% 53%

56% 5% 40%

33% 4% 63%


52

06

| DE

TAILE

D R

ESU

LTS



WORKING-LIFE INTENTIONSFIGURE 6.9: Working life intentions; retirement and planned duration of working life within the NTPS and broader labour market ( i.e. outside the NTPS)

2014 2011 2009

Ret

irem

ent A

ge

Before 55

At 55

Between 56 - 59

At 60

Between 61 - 64

At 65

Beyond 65

Don’t know

Cur

rent

wor

king

life

inte

ntio

ns

in N

T Pu

blic

Sec

tor

Less than 12 months

Between 1 - 3 years

Between 3 - 5 years

Between 5 - 10 years


Over 15 years

Don’t know

Cur

rent

wor

king

life

inte

ntio

n in

the

broa

der l

abou

r mar

ket,

outs

ide

the

NTP

S

Less than 12 months

Between 1 - 3 years

Between 3 - 5 years



Over 15 years

Don’t know

3%

3%7%

8%

8%11%11%

10%12%

11%

11%14%

15%

15%17%

15%

24%20%

19%

25%18%

20%

4%6%

5%

11%13%13%

12%12%

14%

18%15%

20%

18%15%

20%

13%9%

12%

18%13%

15%

2%2%

3%

3%3%3%

4%4%

5%

9%8%

10%

9%7%

9%

24%19%

20%

47%55%

51%


530

6 | D

ETA

ILED

RE

SULT

S



BULLYINGThe 2014 People Matter Survey asked a range of questions around bullying, the intention being to quantify:

- the numbers of people who have experienced bullying in the 12 months

- the visibility of bullying within the workplace

- the nature and source of bullying incidents

- the effectiveness of processes designed to handle bullying.

FIGURE 6.10: Personally experienced bullying in last 12 months (by employee-group)

FIGURE 6.11: Likelihood of reporting bullying

Female

Male


Non ATSI

Prefer not to say

Disabled - No

Disabled - Yes

Non-ongoing

Ongoing

15-34 years

35-54 years

55+ years

Female

Male


Non ATSI

Prefer not to say

Disabled - No

Disabled - Yes

Non-ongoing

Ongoing

15-34 years

35-54 years

55+ years

FIGURE 6.12: Satisfaction with the way formal complaint was handled

Female

Male


Non ATSI

Prefer not to say

Disabled - No

Disabled - Yes

Non-ongoing

Ongoing

15-34 years

35-54 years

55+ years

Yes Not Sure No

Yes No

No Not Sure Too Early To Tell Yes

23%

19%

26%

21%

33%

21%

31%

20%

22%

19%

23%

22%

7%

8%

11%

7%

10%

7%

6%

6%

7%

8%

7%

5%

70%

74%

63%

73%

57%

72%

63%

74%

71%

73%

70%

72%

21%

19%

22%

20%

25%

20%

22%

18%

21%

17%

22%

20%

79%

81%

78%

80%

75%

80%

78%

82%

79%

83%

78%

80%

53%

56%

48%

54%

61%

54%

64%

40%

57%

52%

58%

45%

7%

7%

9%

7%

6%

7%

5%

6%

7%

5%

9%

4%

17%

21%

21%

18%

16%

18%

23%

21%

17%

27%

13%

23%

23%

17%

21%

22%

16%

22%

9%

33%

19%

17%

20%

28%


54

06

| DE

TAILE

D R

ESU

LTS



FIGURE 6.13: Nature, offender and actions taken by witnesses

Bul

lyin

g N

atur

e*

Being assigned meaningless tasks unrelated to the job

Deliberately changing rosters to inconvenience you

Deliberately withholding information vital to your effective work performance

Exclusion/isolation

Given impossible assignments

Intimidation

Other


Psychological harassment

Verbal abuse

15%

Bul

lied

by*

Client/customer

Fellow worker


Immediate manager



Senior manager

Subordinate

Act

ion

afte

r wit

ness

ing

bully

ing* Made a note of the occurrence but took no action

Other

Reported the matter formally or informally

Spoke about the matter to the person perceived to be the bully

Spoke about the matter to the person perceived to have been bullied

Took no action

9%

32%

43%

11%

52%

15%

12%

32%

34%

4%

29%

8%

29%

3%

12%

31%

7%

19%

8%

46%

24%

42%

11%

* Workplace bullying is repeated, unreasonable behaviour directed to an employee or group of employees that creates a risk to health and safety. Bullying should not be confused with legitimate feedback given to staff (including negative comments) on their work performance or work-related behaviour; or other legitimate management decisions and actions undertaken in a reasonable and respectful way.


550

6 | D

ETA

ILED

RE

SULT

S



FIGURE 6.13.1: Female FIGURE 6.13.2: Male

Senior manager

Immediate manager

Fellow worker


Subordinate



Client/customer

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

FIGURE 6.13.4: Prefer not to identify as either ATSI or non-ATSI

FIGURE 6.13.3: Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander

Senior manager

Immediate manager

Fellow worker


Subordinate



Client/customer

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Senior manager

Immediate manager

Fellow worker


Subordinate



Client/customer

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Senior manager

Immediate manager

Fellow worker


Subordinate



Client/customer

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%


56

06

| DE

TAILE

D R

ESU

LTS



FIGURE 6.13.5: Disability FIGURE 6.13.6: Non-ongoing Employees

Senior manager

Immediate manager

Fellow worker


Subordinate



Client/customer

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

FIGURE 6.13.8: 55+ years of ageFIGURE 6.13.7: Ongoing

Senior manager

Immediate manager

Fellow worker


Subordinate



Client/customer

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Senior manager

Immediate manager

Fellow worker


Subordinate



Client/customer

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Senior manager

Immediate manager

Fellow worker


Subordinate



Client/customer

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

57

EMPLOYEE-GROUP RESPONSE PROFILES



Gender 58

Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander Status 59

Disability 61

Managerial Responsibility 62

Employment Type 63

Caring Responsibility 64

Age Group 66

58

07

| EM

PLO

YE

E-G

RO

UP

RE

SPO

NSE

PR

OF

ILES



07 | EMPLOYEE-GROUP RESPONSE PROFILES

GENDERFIGURE 7.1: Values, principles, work environment, job satisfaction and engagement by gender

Sixty three per cent of the response sample identified as female and 37 per cent of the response sample identified as male. This reflects the same percentages of males and females identified in the 2013-14 State of the Service Report and means the survey attracted an accurate proportion of male and female respondents.

While there was a moderate difference between the responses of male and female employees, the trend for minority demographic sub-groups to view their workplace less positively in other aspects of the survey continued for males. The greatest difference between male and female employees was in the areas of merit followed by the NTPS value and change management.

Valu

es


Ethical practice

Diversity

Accountability

Respect

Leadership

Impartiality


Resolving issues fairly

Merit

Equal employment

Performance and conduct

Workplace wellbeing

Employee commitment

Change management

Level of satisfaction

Engagement

89%

Female Male

PSEM

A

Empl

oym

ent P

rinc

iple

sW

ork

Envi

ronm

ent

Job Satisfaction

and Engagement

84.3%

85.8%82.5%

88.3%85.3%

81.9%80.3%

85.9%84.4%

84.5%82.7%

71.2%69.3%

85.6%84.2%

70.8%68.3%

72%66.2%

88.3%85.3%

76.8%74.7%

90.9%90.2%

80.9%78.6%

62.7%57.6%

68.3%65.4%

64.9%61.8%


590

7 | E

MP

LOY

EE

-GR

OU

P R

ESP

ON

SE P

RO

FILE

S



ABORIGINAL OR TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER STATUSFIGURE 7.2: Values, principles, work environment, job satisfaction and engagement by ATSI status

Seven per cent of the response sample identified as ATSI and five per cent of the response sample preferred not to say. This compares with an actual ATSI workforce profile of nine per cent, as identified in the 2013-14 State of the Service Report.

Following a similar pattern to that seen in the 2011 and 2009 surveys, in 2014 ATSI respondents tended to report lower agreement percentage scores than their non-ATSI counterparts. This was most notable within the areas of diversity and equal employment.

On average, ATSI confidence in the NTPS Values was lower than that of non-ATSI employees. In particular, ATSI employees were more likely to perceive cultural diversity as a barrier to success in the workplace and to be less positive about their agency’s committed to ethical practice and accountability

Perceptions regarding practice of the PSEMA Values were also lower for ATSI employees than non-ATSI employees, however, the difference was less pronounced. Perceptions of equal employment opportunity were significantly lower but, perceptions around resolving issues were fractionally higher.

Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander Non ATSI

Valu

es


Ethical practice

Diversity

Accountability

Respect

Leadership

Impartiality



Merit

Equal employment


Workplace wellbeing

Employee commitment

Change management


Engagement

84.9%

PSEM

A

Empl

oym

ent P

rinc

iple

sW

ork

Envi

ronm

ent

Job Satisfaction

and Engagement

88%

82%86.4%

83.2%88%

78.4%82.2%

83.7%85.9%

84.1%84.4%

69.2%72.3%

83.1%85.8%

72.3%70.7%

68.4%71%

83.2%88%

75.2%76.8%

89.6%91.1%

80.2%80.6%

64.4%61.4%

66.3%68%

64.9%64.2%


60

07

| EM

PLO

YE

E-G

RO

UP

RE

SPO

NSE

PR

OF

ILES



Workplace wellbeing, commitment and employee engagement scores for ATSI and non-ATSI samples tended to be marginally lower. Reversing this general trend, ATSI employees had a noticeably more positive view of change management practices than did their non-ATSI colleagues.

Twenty six per cent of ATSI employees reported having been bullied in the past 12 months (compared to 21 per cent for non-ATSI). Although the rate at which ATSI employees formally reported bullying incidents remains low (at 22 per cent), it is marginally higher than for non-ATSI employees (20 per cent). Satisfaction with the way formal complaints were handled were also very similar between ATSI (19 per cent) and non-ATSI (20 per cent) employees.

Job satisfaction for ATSI employees was seven percentage points lower than their non-ATSI colleagues while any difference in employee engagement is largely indistinguishable.

In keeping with Government’s long-standing focus on improving Indigenous employment in the NTPS (articulated most recently in the Indigenous Employment and Career Development Strategy 2015-20 (IECDS)), further work will be undertaken to explore the gaps between ATSI and non-ATSI experiences.

Survey results show that ATSI employees were 25 per cent more likely to experience bullying than their non-ATSI colleagues.


610

7 | E

MP

LOY

EE

-GR

OU

P R

ESP

ON

SE P

RO

FILE

S



DISABILITYFIGURE 7.3: Values, principles, work environment, job satisfaction and engagement by disability

Four per cent of the response sample identified as having a disability. This compares with only one per cent of employees who formally identified as having disability in their employment record. As in previous years, this highlights that there is clearly a substantial undercount of employees formally identifying as having a disability. This is likely to mean that around 600 employees across the NTPS are not accessing available support.

Thirty one per cent of employees with disability reported having been bullied in the past 12 months (compared to 21 per cent for those without a disability). The rate at which employees with a disability made a formal complaint (22 per cent) was only marginally higher than for those without disability (20 per cent), however, with an agreement rate of nine per cent, this demographic sub-group was the least satisfied with the outcome of their complaint.

In terms of employee engagement and job satisfaction, those respondents who identified as having disability reported significantly less positive opinions than did those respondents without disability. This is consistent with previous years’ results and demonstrates an ongoing need to improve disability confidence across the sector. Other notable areas in which those with disability scored lower than those without include; resolving issues fairly, the application of the merit principle, and the level that diversity is upheld as a value across the sector.

There were fewer employees with disability who agreed their workplaces were impartial, and a similar disparity with regards to views on leadership. Work will commence on the 2017-2020 Disability Employment Strategy; survey results will influence its design and assist in the formation of key areas for development.

Disability No disability

Valu

es


Ethical practice

Diversity

Accountability

Respect

Leadership

Impartiality



Merit

Equal employment


Workplace wellbeing

Employee commitment

Change management


Engagement

84.4%

PSEM

A

Empl

oym

ent P

rinc

iple

sW

ork

Envi

ronm

ent

Job Satisfaction

and Engagement

87.4%81.7%

85.7%80.9%

87.4%77.9%

81.4%81.2%

85.5%79%

84%65.3%

71.3%80.6%

85.3%62.9%

70.1%59.6%

70.2%80.9%

87.4%

88.6%90.7%

70.1%76.2%

74.5%80.3%

49.2%61.3%

60.4%67.5%

59.9%63.9%


62

07

| EM

PLO

YE

E-G

RO

UP

RE

SPO

NSE

PR

OF

ILES



MANAGERIAL RESPONSIBILITYFIGURE 7.4: Values, principles, work environment, job satisfaction and engagement by management status

Twenty eight per cent of the response sample identified as being managers. This is a significant reduction from the 2011 and 2009 surveys in which 33 per cent and 35 per cent of respondents, respectively, identified as managers.

In all measures, managers were more positive than non-managers. This was significantly so in the areas of accountability, impartiality, resolving issues fairly, merit, performance and conduct, satisfaction and engagement.

Further analysis would be required in order to explain this difference, however, a plausible account would likely consider that non-managers may not always have an awareness or understanding of the strategic intent underlying the decision making processes. Responses regarding change management certainly make apparent the shortcomings of communication processes in many agencies.

OCPE is responding to these results through the delivery of learning and development programs that increase management and leadership capabilities across the sector, as well the delivery of consistent policy advice that recognises and encourages good management practice.

Valu

es


Ethical practice

Diversity

Accountability

Respect

Leadership

Impartiality



Merit

Equal employment


Workplace wellbeing

Employee commitment

Change management


Engagement

86.3%

Not Manager Manager

PSEM

A

Empl

oym

ent P

rinc

iple

sW

ork

Envi

ronm

ent

Job Satisfaction

and Engagement

89.5%

84.5%88.2%

87%87.6%

79.3%86%

84.1%88.3%

82.9%86%

68.9%76.3%

84.6%86.3%

67.9%74.6%

67.3%75.5%

87%87.6%

74.3%80.2%

89.4%93.7%

79.3%82.1%

59.7%63.5%

65.5%71.7%

62.5%66.9%


630

7 | E

MP

LOY

EE

-GR

OU

P R

ESP

ON

SE P

RO

FILE

S



EMPLOYMENT TYPEFIGURE 7.5: Values, principles, work environment, job satisfaction and engagement by employment type

Seventy eight per cent of employees identified as being in ongoing employment with 16 per cent being on fixed-term temporary contracts. Four per cent of the response sample was on executive contracts and two percent on casual contract.

The greatest differences in agreement scores between non-ongoing and ongoing employees was for questions relating to ‘resolving issues fairly’ and ‘performance and conduct’. ‘Equal employment opportunity’, ‘diversity’ and ‘leadership’ were amongst the highest scoring indices among temporary employees.

Although, employee engagement was also noticeably higher for temporary staff (67.2 compared to 63 per cent), these results were tempered by ‘job satisfaction’ and ’workplace wellbeing’ scores that were only a fraction above average and indicate there may be a sustainability issue for many of these employees.

Non-ongoing employees identified that they were subject to a bullying at a marginally lower rate (20 per cent) than were their ongoing colleagues (22 per cent). Non-ongoing employees were a little less likely to report bullying (18 per cent) than were ongoing employees (21 per cent). In terms of the outcome of a complaint, non-ongoing employees were significantly more likely to be satisfied (33 per cent) than were non-ongoing employees (19 per cent).

Executive Ongoing Fixed Term Casual Don’t Know

Valu

es


Ethical practice

Diversity

Accountability

Respect

Leadership

Impartiality



Merit

Equal employment


Workplace wellbeing

Employee commitment

Change management


Engagement

PSEM

A

Empl

oym

ent P

rinc

iple

sW

ork

Envi

ronm

ent

Job Satisfaction

and Engagement

93%86%

89%91%

87%92%

85%88%88%

84%93%

86%91%

90%87%

91%80%

85%84%

79%92%

84%88%

86%85%

91%83%

88%87%

79%85%

69%78%

77%72%

91%84%

87%88%

83%85%

67%77%77%

69%87%

67%77%

74%63%

93%86%

91%90%

87%87%

74%82%

78%78%

96%90%

91%92%

93%86%

79%82%

88%80%

79%58%

69%71%

62%78%

66%69%

67%58%

76%62%

68%66%

62%


64

07

| EM

PLO

YE

E-G

RO

UP

RE

SPO

NSE

PR

OF

ILES



CARING RESPONSIBILITYFIGURE 7.6: Values, principles, work environment, job satisfaction and engagement by caring responsibility

Fifty five per cent of respondents identified as having caring responsibilities. This is a marked increase from 2011 and 2009 when only 42 per cent of employees identified as having caring responsibilities.

Figure 7.6 demonstrates an apparently negligible difference in views between employees with caring responsibilities and those without, however, these results were skewed by the large number of respondents with children, who were greatest in number and held substantially more positive views than other types of carers, therefore raising the combined average.

As Figure 7.7 shows, there are moderate differences between parents and other carers.

Due to low response numbers for employees with certain types of caring responsibility, it is difficult to determine a meaningful priority order or trend in this data but it is clear that agencies should be mindful that employees with caring responsibilities may require additional support or consideration in the work place. OCPE will look to undertake further analysis of carer needs, with a view to assisting agencies to improve policies relating to carers.

Valu

es


Ethical practice

Diversity

Accountability

Respect

Leadership

Impartiality


Human Resource Management PrincipleS5C[c] - Resolving issues fairly


Human Resource Management PrincipleS5E - Equal employment

Human Resource Principle S5F- Performance and conduct

Workplace wellbeing

Employee commitment

Change management


87%

PSEM

A

Empl

oym

ent P

rinc

iple

sW

ork

Envi

ronm

ent

Job Satisfaction and Engagement

88%

Any caring responsibility No caring responsibility

Engagement Index*

85%86%86%

89%81%82%

85%86%

84%84%

85%86%

70%72%

70%71%

69%71%

76%77%

86%89%

91%90%

80%80%

61%60%

67%67%

64%64%


650

7 | E

MP

LOY

EE

-GR

OU

P R

ESP

ON

SE P

RO

FILE

S



FIGURE 7.7: Values, principles, work environment, job satisfaction and engagement by caring responsibility type

Any other Person Disabled Other Relative Parents/Elderly Child(ren) No caring responsibility

Valu

es


Ethical practice

Diversity

Accountability

Respect

Leadership

Impartiality


Human Resource Management Principle S5C[c] - Resolving issues fairly


Human Resource Management Principle S5E - Equal employment

Human Resource Principle S5F - Performance and conduct

Workplace wellbeing

Employee commitment

Change management


Engagement

86%85%

86%85%

87%88%

PSEM

A

Empl

oym

ent P

rinc

iple

sW

ork

Envi

ronm

ent

82%82%

83%83%

85%86%

84%85%

84%85%

86%89%

78%77%

79%79%

81%82%

84%84%

83%84%

85%86%

82%80%

81%82%

84%84%

66%65%65%

68%70%

72%

83%83%

83%83%

85%86%

67%69%

66%68%

70%71%

66%67%67%

69%69%

71%

84%85%

84%85%

86%89%

73%73%

72%74%

76%77%

90%90%

90%90%

91%90%

77%78%

76%78%

80%80%

61%59%

58%60%

61%60%

63%65%65%

66%67%67%

62%63%

62%63%

64%64%


66

07

| EM

PLO

YE

E-G

RO

UP

RE

SPO

NSE

PR

OF

ILES



AGE GROUPFIGURE 7.8: Values, principles, work environment, job satisfaction and engagement by age

Twenty five per cent of respondents were aged 15 and 34 years, 54 per cent between 35 and 54 years, and 21 per cent 55 years or above.

There were minimal differences in response by age categories.

Generally speaking, employees aged between 35 and 54 years of age were slightly less positive than their older colleagues. This difference is accentuated by an apparent tendency for employees aged between 15 and 34 to be a little more positive than the NTPS average. This tendency continues in responses to bullying questions where perceptions of bullying were lower amongst the youngest cohort. However, employees aged between 15 and 34 were less likely to have submitted a formal complaint (17 per cent) and, where this was the case, to have been satisfied with the outcome (17 per cent).

Employee age is a factor that is being looked at closely for other bodies of work currently being undertaken by OCPE. This includes a sector wide policy dealing with transition to retirement.

Valu

es


Ethical practice

Diversity

Accountability

Respect

Leadership

Impartiality



Merit

Equal employment


Workplace wellbeing

Employee commitment

Change management


Engagement

88%

15-34 years 35-54 years 55+ years

PSEM

A

Empl

oym

ent P

rinc

iple

sW

ork

Envi

ronm

ent

Job Satisfaction

and Engagement

87%87%

87%85%

86%

89%86%

88%

82%80%

82%

87%85%85%

85%83%

84%

75%69%

71%

86%84%

86%

73%68%

71%

72%69%

70%

89%86%

88%

80%75%75%

91%90%

91%

82%79%

81%

65%59%

61%

69%66%

68%

65%63%

64%

67

APPENDICES



Appendix 1 – Reading the Results 68

Appendix 2 – NTPS Values and PSEMA Employment Principles 70

Appendix 3 – NTPS 2014 People Matter Survey Instrument 71



08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 1

UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFERENT RESPONSE SCALES USED IN THE SURVEYFor most of the questions in the survey, respondents are asked to select an answer from a small number of set responses. Different response scales are used within the survey for different types of questions. Each set requires a slightly different way of reading and interpretation.

Yes/No

Interpreting the ‘yes’ and ‘no’ responses is reasonably straightforward as they provide a clear answer to the question asked. However, you should note that a ‘yes’ answer is not always positive. For example, a ‘yes’ response in answer to ‘the question have you been bullied?’ is a cause for concern and action.

The ‘don’t know’ answers mean that the respondent does not know if what they have experienced fits with what the question is about. In other words, the respondent is unclear about definitions. The ‘don’t know’ responses are worth paying attention to. In most instances, the fact that the respondent doesn’t know if they have experienced something (such as receiving feedback) is significant. In the example given here, if someone doesn’t know whether or not they have been given feedback, then it is likely that whatever feedback they have been given has been poorly delivered and probably ineffectual.

Agreement (including don’t know)

In all questions with this set of answers, ‘agree’ and ‘strongly agree’ produce a positive result. The larger the percentage, the better. Conversely, ‘disagree’ and ‘strongly disagree’ responses represent a negative result. The larger the percentage for these options, the greater the cause for leadership concern and the need for leadership action.

It is also important to consider the ‘don’t know’ responses. Having staff who do not know, for example, whether or not the workgroup strives to achieve customer satisfaction, or whether or not they should avoid conflicts of interest in their work, represents a risk. A large number of ‘don’t knows’ to these questions should be a cause for leadership concern and a prompt for leadership action (usually involving making staff aware of particular practices).

Agreement (including neither agree nor disagree)

Survey questions about employee engagement do not allow respondents to select ‘don’t know’. Instead, there is the opportunity to say that they ‘neither agree nor disagree’ with the statement.

The percentage of respondents who select the ‘neither’ option is significant. They represent staff who could easily go either way in terms of being committed to, and willing to go the extra mile for, the agency. This is particularly significant if the agency is about to experience difficult times (such as major organisational change) which may place extra demands on staff.

In terms of leadership responses, actions should be developed to address both the disengaged (people who ‘disagree’ or ‘strongly disagree’ with the statements) and those who could easily become disengaged (people who neither agree nor disagree). Both groups represent a risk for the agency, which the latter group represents an opportunity to strengthen the agency.

Engagement index

These questions were sourced from the UK Civil Service (and also appear in the People Matter Survey equivalents in both the NSW and the Australian Public Service) and were developed from research performed by the UK Civil Service. The index measures five key aspects that an engaged employee should exhibit: pride, advocacy, attachment, inspiration and motivation.

The higher the score, the higher the level of engagement the staff have with the agency.

As a basic benchmark, in 2014, the UK Civil Service recorded an overall engagement index of 9, the Australian Public Service 62, NSW 5. In 2014 Northern Territory Sector organisations that participated in the People Matter Survey recorded an overall engagement index of 4per cent.

In future years, it is expected that more emphasis will be placed on the engagement index in the reporting of People Matter Survey results including the presentation of drivers of engagement.

08 | APPENDIX 1 – READING THE RESULTS



08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 1

08 | APPENDIX 1 – READING THE RESULTS

Satisfaction

This set of answers is offered as response options for a set of questions about job satisfaction.

Generally, a positive result is one where there is a large percentage of staff indicating that they are ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’, and a small percentage of staff indicating that they are ‘dissatisfied’ or ‘very dissatisfied’, with different aspects of their working environment. However, if the agency is about to embark on major change, having a high percentage of staff who are ‘very satisfied’ with all aspects of the status quo may not be a good outcome. It may make it more difficult to get the staff to accept and implement the changes. Conversely, in the same scenario, having a high percentage of staff who are ‘very dissatisfied’ with the status quo might be a good thing. The changes may be seen as an opportunity to improve the prospect for job satisfaction so staff may be more inclined to support the changes.

As with the question about engagement, there was not a ‘don’t know’ option in this answer set. There is a ‘neither’ option where staff neither agree nor disagree with the statement. Again, the percentage of staff who select the ‘neither ‘option should be of interest to agency leaders. Job satisfaction is a driver for:

§ performance (people who are more satisfied are likely to perform better); and

§ commitment (people who are more satisfied are likely to remain loyal to the agency, even in the face of difficulties or alternative employment opportunities).

People who are ‘neither satisfied nor dissatisfied’ may not be performing to their full potential and they may not be as committed to the agency as they could be. In other words they represent an opportunity for improving the agency’s performance and reducing exposure to workforce risks.

The NTPS People Matter Survey adopts a methodology that allows for better comparison with other jurisdictions.



08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 2 The People Matter Survey helps identify the extent

to which the Northern Territory Public Sector Values and Principles (as established under the Code of Conduct and the Public Sector Employment and Management Act 2012) are being applied within the Northern Territory Public Service.

PUBLIC SECTOR VALUESCommitment to Service – The NTPS is professional, hardworking, effective, innovative and efficient, working collaboratively to achieve the best results for the Northern Territory.

Ethical Practice – The NTPS upholds the highest standards of practice and acts with integrity in all that it does.

Respect – The NTPS respects all people, and in particular their rights as individuals.

Accountability – The NTPS is transparent and accountable in all its actions.

Impartiality – The NTPS is apolitical and provides the Government with advice that is objective, timely and based on the best available evidence.

Diversity – The NTPS values the diversity of its workforce as well as the Northern Territory population it serves.

It is recognised that Accountability is not comprehensively measured in the current survey instrument. It is intended that future surveys will introduce additional questions to remedy this issue.

PUBLIC SECTOR PRINCIPLESThe administration management principle - Fair, efficient and effective service to the community and government;

The human resource management principle - promoting working environments where employees are treated fairly, including the following:

- merit – choosing people for the right reasons

- equality of employment - providing a fair go for all

- performance and conduct - managing our behaviours in a professional manner while also being mindful of our impact on colleagues, Government and the community at large.

08 | APPENDIX 2 – NTPS VALUES AND PSEMA EMPLOYMENT PRINCIPLES

The NTPS Values establish clear expectations around attitudes and behaviours in the workplace. Including how our employees are treated and how they, in turn, treat others.”



08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 3

SURVEY DEFINITIONSPlease use the following definitions when completing the survey questions.

Senior Manager: the most senior group of managers in your agency. (i.e. the CEO and the people who report directly to them)

Manager: the person in your workplace, project or team to whom you report on a daily basis. If you work for more than one team/work unit, please think of the manager with whom you work most frequently.

Workplace: the immediate workplace, work unit, project or team where you spend the largest proportion of you time at work.

Agency: the agency in which you are employed

Customer(s): the person(s) you provide advice or service to (internal or external to your agency).

PART ONE

1 Sex Female / Male

2 What is your age? 15-24 years

25-34 years

35-44 years

45-54 years

55-64 years

65+ years

3 In which country were you born? Born in Australia

Born overseas in a country where English is a primary language

Born overseas in other country

Don’t know

4 Do you speak a language other than English at home? Yes / No

5 Are you of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander descent?(A person of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander descent identifies as such and is accepted as such by the community with which he or she is associated.)

Yes / No

6 Do you have a disability?NOTE: For the purposes of this survey, a disability is any physical, intellectual, neurological or psychological condition or impairment that may or may not impact on an employee’s ability to perform their work-related activities. Conditions may include an ongoing injury or illness.

Yes / No

7 If you have a disability, does this require a work-related adjustment(s)?NOTE: For the Survey purposes, work-related adjustments may include modification of work premises or equipment, changes to equipment, the provision of adaptive technology, or changes to job design, work schedules or other work practices.

Yes / No

08 | APPENDIX 3 – NTPS 2014 PEOPLE MATTER SURVEY INSTRUMENT



08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 3

08 | APPENDIX 3 – 2014 NTPS PEOPLE MATTER SURVEY INSTRUMENT

8 In which region of the Northern Territory do you usually work?


Darwin Region Other

East Arnhem Region

Katherine Region

Barkly Region

Alice Springs Town

Alice Springs Region Other


9 Do you work full-time or part-time? Full-time / Part-time (if full-time go to question 11)

10 If part-time what are your contracted hours each fortnight?

16 hours or less

17 to 32 hours

33 to 48 hours

49 to 64 hours

more than 64

11 What is your current employment status? Ongoing (Permanent)

Fixed Period (Temporary)

Casual

Executive Contract

Don’t know

12 What is your gross annual salary (excluding allowances)If you work part-time, select the full-time salary range equivalent to your current level. If you are paid an hourly rate, select the salary range that is closest to your annual gross earnings.

Less than $35,000

$35,000 - $44,999

$45,000 - $54,999

$55,000 - $64,999

$65,000 - $74,999

$75,000 - $84,999

$85,000 - $94,999

$95,000 - $104,999

$105,000 - $114,999

$115,000 - $124,999

$125,000 - $134,999

$135,000+

Don’t know



08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 3


13 What is the highest level of formal education you have completed?

Doctoral Degree level

Master Degree level

Graduate Diploma or Graduate Certificate level

Bachelor Degree level including honours degrees

Advanced Diploma or Diploma level

Certificate level, including trade

Year 12 or equivalent

Less than year 12 or equivalent

14 Are you the manager of one or more employees? Yes / No

15 How long have you worked for your current agency? .......... years (if less than 1 year, please enter 0)

16 How long have you worked in the NT Public Service? .......... years (if less than 1 year, please enter 0)

17 What is your current Classification/Pay Award Group? Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Practitioners

Assistant Teacher

Darwin Port Corporation (All Classifications including Marine Pilots)

Dentist

Executive Contract Officer (Including DPC and PWC)

Fire Fighter

General NTPS – Administrative Stream

General NTPS – Professional Stream

General NTPS – Technical Stream

General NTPS – Physical Stream

Graduate

Interpreter

Medical Officers

Teaching Principals

NT Institute of Sport

Nurse

Pilot (PFRES)

Police Officer (PFRES)

Power and Water Corporation – Admin & Corp Services

Power and Water Corporation – Service Worker

Power and Water Corporation – Science & Engineering

Power and Water Corporation - Technical Power

Power and Water Corporation - Other

Prison Educators

Prison Officer/Senior Prison Officer

Teacher (Including Senior Teachers and Assistant Principals)

Trainees/NTPS Apprentices/NICP

Executive Contract Principals

Other



18 Do you spend some time each week providing care* for another person (mark any or all that apply)?*In this sense ‘care’ means looking after a person, as they are too young to look after themselves independently, or they are ill, disabled or elderly and need assistance with cooking meals, shopping, housekeeping, transport or personal care (showering etc.).

Child or children

Elderly relative/s

Disabled person

Any other person

No, I don’t have any caring responsibilities

19 What are your current working life intentions in the NTPS? less than 12 months

Between 1 – 3 years




Over 15 years

Don’t know

20 What are your current working life intentions in the broader labor market e.g. outside of the NTPS?

less than 12 months





Over 15 years

Don’t know

21 What age do you anticipate you would consider retiring? Before 55

At 55

Between 56 – 59

At 60

Between 61 – 64

At 65

Beyond 65

Don’t know

PART TWO

Please indicate which of the following policies and processes you are aware of.

22 A The NTPS code of conduct Yes / No / Don’t know

B The NTPS values Yes / No / Don’t know

C My agency’s programs to support employee wellbeing (i.e. Employee Assistance Program or equivalent)

Yes / No / Don’t know

08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 3




PART THREE

Please read each statement and indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree, based upon what you have experienced or observed in your agency in the last 12 months

23 A Employees in my workplace strive to provide excellent customer service

Strongly disagree / disagree / agree / strongly agree / don’t know

B My manager is committed to ensuring a high standard of service


C My agency provides high quality services to the Northern Territory community


D In my workplace, we use feedback from our customers/clients/stakeholders to improve the services we deliver


E My workplace strives to achieve customer satisfaction Strongly disagree / disagree / agree / strongly agree / don’t know

F My manager is committed to ensuring customers receive a high standard of service


G In my workplace, work is undertaken using best practice approaches


24 A Employees in my agency behave in an ethical manner Strongly disagree / disagree / agree / strongly agree / don’t know

B In my workplace, decisions are made fairly, objectively and ethically


C My manager encourages employees to behave in an ethical manner


D I am confident that I would be protected from reprisal for reporting improper conduct


E People in my workplace do not use confidential information gained at work for personal use


F People in my workplace are honest, open and transparent in their dealings


G In my agency, there are procedures and systems designed to prevent employees engaging in improper conduct


H My manager encourages employees to avoid conflicts of interest


I In my agency, earning and sustaining a high level of public trust is seen as important


08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 3




25 A Senior managers model the NTPS values Strongly disagree / disagree / agree / strongly agree / don’t know

B My manager actively discourages behaviours that are inconsistent with the values


C I encourage people in my workplace to act in ways that are consistent with the values


D In my agency behaviour consistent with the values is acknowledged


Please indicate which of the following you have experienced within your agency in the last 12 months

26 A My agency has a formal performance management system


B My manager has talked to me about what I am doing well in my work


C My manager has talked to me about what I could do to improve my performance


D I have a current performance agreement in place Yes / No / Don’t know

E The performance feedback has been beneficial to my ongoing development


F I have received formal feedback* on individual performance


G I have received informal feedback** on individual performance


* Formal feedback generally refers to documented feedback such as an annual performance agreement or a formal coaching session.** Informal feedback refers to conversations about your day to day work performance.

Please read each statement and indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree, based upon what you have experienced or observed in your agency in the last 12 months.

27 A My workplace selects people with the right knowledge, skills and abilities to fill job vacancies


B Recruitment & promotion decisions in this workplace are fair and based on merit


C My agency has policies that require recruitment of employees on the basis of merit.


D In my workplace, decisions about access to development opportunities are made on the basis of merit


E My performance is assessed against clear criteria Strongly disagree / disagree / agree / strongly agree / don’t know

08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 3




28 A My manager treats employees with dignity and respect Strongly disagree / disagree / agree / strongly agree / don’t know

B My manager keeps the people in my workplace informed about what is going on


C My input is adequately sought and considered about decisions that directly affect me


D My manager is good at managing people Strongly disagree / disagree / agree / strongly agree / don’t know

E My manager involves me in decisions about my work Strongly disagree / disagree / agree / strongly agree / don’t know

F In my agency, there are opportunities for me to develop my skills and knowledge


G In my agency, employment arrangements are available to help employees achieve a work-life balance


29 A Gender is not a barrier to success in my agency Strongly disagree / disagree / agree / strongly agree / don’t know

B Disability is not a barrier to success in my agency Strongly disagree / disagree / agree / strongly agree / don’t know

C Age is not a barrier to success in my agency Strongly disagree / disagree / agree / strongly agree / don’t know

D Cultural background is not a barrier to success in my agency


E Having family responsibilities is not a barrier to success in my agency


F Working part-time or using other flexible work options is not a barrier to success in my agency


G Equal Employment Opportunity is provided in my agency


H My agency is committed to creating a diverse workforce (e.g. age, gender, cultural background)


30 A In my agency there are clear procedures and processes for resolving grievances


B I would be confident in approaching my manager to discuss concerns and grievances


C I am confident that if I lodge a grievance in my agency, it would be investigated in a thorough and objective manner


D I feel confident that if I lodge a grievance, I will not suffer any negative consequences


08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 3




PART FOUR

Please read each statement and indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree, based upon what you have experienced or observed in your agency in the last 12 months

31 A I receive help and support from other people in my workplace


B I have enough work to keep me busy Strongly disagree / disagree / agree / strongly agree / don’t know

C I feel I make a contribution to achieving the agency’s objectives


D I am provided with the opportunity to work to my full potential


E There is a good team spirit in my workplace Strongly disagree / disagree / agree / strongly agree / don’t know

F I view my agency as an employer of choice Strongly disagree / disagree / agree / strongly agree / don’t know

G I rarely think about leaving this agency Strongly disagree / disagree / agree / strongly agree / don’t know

H I provide help and support to other people in my workplace


I I am encouraged to report health and safety incidents and injuries


32 A My workplace is committed to employee health and safety


B My manager ensures the occupational health and safety guidelines for my work place are followed


C My manager encourages employees to report health and safety incidents and hazards


D Employees in my workplace display good occupational health and safety awareness


E At present, I do not feel overly stressed at work Strongly disagree / disagree / agree / strongly agree / don’t know

08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 3




33 A There is a clear consultation process when change in my agency is proposed


B Communications about change from senior managers are timely and relevant


C In times of change, senior managers provide sufficient information about the purpose of the changes


D I am provided with the opportunity to influence changes in my agency


E In times of change, I have an obligation to help my work colleagues understand and adapt to the new ways of working


PART FIVE

Please indicate your satisfaction against each of the following, based on what you have experienced and observed in your agency in the last 12 months

34 A Opportunities for development Very dissatisfied / dissatisfied / neither satisfied or dissatisfied / satisfied / very satisfied

B Pay/remuneration Very dissatisfied / dissatisfied / neither satisfied or dissatisfied / satisfied / very satisfied

C Job security Very dissatisfied / dissatisfied / neither satisfied or dissatisfied / satisfied / very satisfied

D Relationship with people in my workplace Very dissatisfied / dissatisfied / neither satisfied or dissatisfied / satisfied / very satisfied

E Relationship with manager Very dissatisfied / dissatisfied / neither satisfied or dissatisfied / satisfied / very satisfied

F Ability to work on own initiative Very dissatisfied / dissatisfied / neither satisfied or dissatisfied / satisfied / very satisfied

G Interesting/challenging work provided Very dissatisfied / dissatisfied / neither satisfied or dissatisfied / satisfied / very satisfied

H Working environment Very dissatisfied / dissatisfied / neither satisfied or dissatisfied / satisfied / very satisfied

I Work-life balance Very dissatisfied / dissatisfied / neither satisfied or dissatisfied / satisfied / very satisfied

I Please indicate your level of satisfaction with your present job overall

Very dissatisfied / dissatisfied / neither satisfied or dissatisfied / satisfied / very satisfied

08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 3




Please read each statement and indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree, based upon what you have experienced or observed in your agency in the last 12 months.

35 A I would recommend my agency as a good place to work

Strongly disagree / disagree / Neither agree nor disagree / agree / strongly agree

B I am proud to tell others I work for my agency Strongly disagree / disagree / Neither agree nor disagree / agree / strongly agree

C I feel a strong personal attachment to my agency Strongly disagree / disagree / Neither agree nor disagree / agree / strongly agree

D My agency motivates me to help achieve its objectives

Strongly disagree / disagree / Neither agree nor disagree / agree / strongly agree

E My agency inspires me to do the best in my job Strongly disagree / disagree / Neither agree nor disagree / agree / strongly agree

PART SIX

Please select the answer that best represents your view

36 A I believe my agency will take action as a result of this survey


Please indicate if in your current agency you have:*Workplace bullying is repeated, unreasonable behaviour directed to an employee or a group of employees that creates a risk to health and safety.

Bullying should not be confused with legitimate feedback given to staff (including negative comments) on their work performance or work-related behaviour; or other legitimate management decisions and actions undertaken in a reasonable and respectful way.

37 A Witnessed bullying* at work in the last 12 months Yes / No (if no go to C)

B If ‘YES’ what action did you take? Spoke about the matter to the person perceived to be the bullying

Spoke about the matter to the person perceived to have been bullied

Reported the matter formally or informally

Made a note of the occurrence but took no action

Took no action

Other

C Personally experienced bullying* at work in the last 12 months

Yes – but I am not currently experiencing this behaviour

Yes – and I am currently experiencing this behaviour

No (go to question 38)

Not sure (go to question 38)

08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 3




D If ‘YES’

Please indicate who you were bullied by?

A senior manager

Your immediate manager/supervisor

A fellow worker

A group of fellow workers

A subordinate

A client/customer

A member of the public


E Which of the following best describes the nature of the bullying you have experienced

Verbal abuse

Exclusion/isolation

Psychological harassment

Intimidation

Being assigned meaningless tasks unrelated to the job

Given impossible assignments

Deliberately changing work rosters to inconvenience you

Deliberately withholding information vital to your effective work performance

Other (please specify): ………………….......................


F Have you submitted a formal complaint regarding the bullying incident you personally experienced?

Yes / No (if no go to questions 38)

G If you have submitted a formal complaint were you satisfied with the way it was handled?


PART SEVEN

Have you any comments or feedback to add?

There are two comments sections available – one about your agency and one about the survey.

38. Is there something else you would like to share with your agency?

These comments will be shared with your agency in their original form and with no indication as to who has submitted the comment. Please refrain from disclosing personal information or identifying individuals in your comments.

08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 3




39. Is there some feedback about the survey content, structure or questions that you wish to share with the Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment?

These comments, with no indication as to who has submitted the comment, will be provided to the Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment.

08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 3




Factor groupings

Change management (leadership)



There is a clear consultation process when change in my agency is proposed


Responsiveness

My workplace strives to achieve customer satisfaction



My agency provides high quality services to the Northern Territory community

In my workplace, work is undertaken using best practice approaches

Integrity




Employees in my agency behave in an ethical manner

My manager encourages employees to avoid conflicts of interest




In my agency behaviour consistent with the values is acknowledged




Merit

Recruitment & promotion decisions in this workplace are fair and based on merit

My workplace selects people with the right knowledge, skills and abilities to fill job vacancies

In my workplace, decisions about access to development opportunities are made on the basis of merit

My agency has policies that require recruitment of employees on the basis of merit


08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 4

08 | APPENDIX 4 – FACTOR GROUPINGS DEFINED BY EXPLORATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS



08 | APPENDIX 4 – FACTOR GROUPINGS DEFINED BY EXPLORATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS

08

| AP

PE

ND

IX 4

Factor groupings

EEO

Age is not a barrier to success in my agency








My contribution

I feel I make a contribution to achieving the agency's objectives

I have enough work to keep me busy

I provide help and support to other people in my workplace

In times of change, I have an obligation to help my work colleagues understand and adapt to the new ways of working

I encourage people in my workplace to act in ways that are consistent with the values


My manager







OHS



My workplace is committed to employee health and safety

Employees in my workplace display good occupational health and safety awareness

I am encouraged to report health and safety incidents and injuries

HOW TO CONTACT US


Level 10, Charles Darwin Centre, 19 The Mall Darwin NT 0800

GPO Box 4371 Darwin NT 0801

Telephone: 08 8999 4282 | Facsimile: 08 8999 4186 | Email: [email protected]

www.nt.gov.au/ocpe

people matter survey report 2014 - ocpe.nt.gov.au

Documents